Welcome to MNTRN - The Interactive Education Network for Talent Acquisition Professionals
Become a member of Minnesota Technical Recruiters Network, right now!
Main Menu
Event Calendar
July 2010
Add event Submit Event
S M T W T F S
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
About MNTRN
The Return of Recruiters - SHRM
The Return of Recruiters
Will staffing professionals be the first or last to be hired as the economy recovers?

Amid accumulating signs that the Great Recession is moderating, companies that believe their core business is improving may begin to restore the employee positions they shed over the last several months.

Has the hiring begun? More to the point, are these companies building up their depleted cadres of staffing professionals in anticipation of employee hiring? Could the hiring of recruiters be, in the terminology of The Conference Board’s monthly national report, a leading economic indicator?

Experts’ opinions vary, but taken together their answers present a vision of workplace recruiting operations after the recession that will be quite different from the staffing models of a few years ago.


Help Wanted?

Angie Salmon, senior vice president of the executive recruiting firm EFL Associates in Leawood, Kan., says some organizations are starting to hire "because they feel more confident about the market and their businesses."

A recent survey by recruitment consulting company DoubleStar of West Chester, Pa., bears this out. Asked late last year whether they planned to increase hiring activity in the first quarter of 2010, 27 percent of respondents—representing organizations in the Mid-Atlantic states—said yes. This represented "a pretty good bump" over the 13 percent who indicated such plans for the fourth quarter of 2009, according to CEO Harry Griendling.

And the Society for Human Resource Management’s latest Leading Indicators of National Employment (LINE) report, released in March, revealed that hiring was up on an annual basis for the fifth straight month. The percentage of companies hiring in manufacturing will reach a level not seen since June 2008, according to the report, and the percentage of companies hiring in the service sector is the highest since July 2007. The LINE report is based on a monthly survey of private-sector HR professionals at more than 500 manufacturing and 500 service-sector companies.

Mitch Beck, president of Crossroads Consulting in Monroe, Conn., has seen hiring pick up but notes that some companies are keeping quiet about it. "What I’m finding is that more companies are starting to hire back but don’t want people to know they’re hiring back, because they don’t want to get inundated" with applications, he says.

Not everyone is optimistic, however, that economic recovery will translate into more jobs. Scott Craighead, general manager, Americas, of Bluesky Executive Search in Fairfield, Conn., says that, in general, "Economic recovery has occurred without hiring increases, as companies have focused on staff cuts to yield profits."

Even if they aren’t cutting staff, companies may not be bringing new hires on board. For example, "Smaller hedge funds that need to hire are standing on the sidelines," says Ev Nucci, owner of Nucci Consulting Group of Gwynedd Valley, Pa., a retained search firm serving the hard-hit asset management industry. "A friend of mine who owns a hedge fund needs four or five people but is holding off" because of concerns about the economy, she explains.

Still, companies with skeleton crews can’t operate that way much longer, says executive search consultant Kevin Palisi of Norwalk, Conn. "You’re going to see more hiring because [companies] can’t squeeze any more blood out of the [surviving] workforce, from a productivity standpoint."


Leading or Lagging Indicator?

"This recession has decimated HR departments and, along with it, recruiting departments," Griendling observes.

Are reinforcements on the way?

Those who think companies plan to increase overall hiring in the near term believe so. For example, Mark Mehler, principal of CareerXroads, a staffing strategy consultancy in Kendall Park, N.J., says certain online companies "are hiring in volume." Those companies—and others wishing to add to employment rolls—must first hire recruiters, he explains, noting that "Recruiting is a bellwether for the economy."

Palisi also believes that organizations "are interested in bringing in recruiters in the near term, the anticipation being they will hire more staff in 2010." He adds that companies "need to hire recruiters six months ahead of the curve."

Others say companies will continue to make do with the resources they have on hand for a while and that an increase in recruiter hiring could actually be a lagging indicator of recovery.

"Usually the first person to get fired and last person to get hired back in a recession is the recruiter," says Dan Finnigan, CEO of Jobvite, a Burlingame, Calif.-based marketer of technology for recruiting via online social networks. "Many companies will actually not hire recruiters right away and be forced to recruit with a smaller recruiting team."

He cites a client—an online retailer—that hired 60 employees in six months during 2009. "They tripled [the workforce] and did it with one recruiter," he says.

Griendling notes that after a recession, companies tend to test the waters by hiring temporary workers as opposed to regular full- or part-time employees. And, in fact, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that 284,000 temporary-help jobs have been added nationwide since September 2009, including 48,000 in February. According to Griendling, it isn’t until later in a recovery, when companies start hiring non-temporary workers, that recruiters are brought on board.

Lisa Rowan, program director, HR, learning and talent strategies, for advisory services provider IDC in Framingham, Mass., expects hiring of temporary workers "to come up further before we see any surge in permanent employment."


Get in Line

Companies looking to grow their workforces may turn to transitional help, such as staffing agencies and freelancers, before hiring recruiters.

As piles of resumes roll into their headquarters, companies find it "easier to inundate an outside recruiter" such as an agency, according to Beck.

Staffing firms and consulting firms confirm the trend. Tracy Cutone, partner and general manager, Human Resources Divisions, of the staffing firm Winter, Wyman Cos. in Waltham, Mass., says demand for contract recruiters from its clients was up more than 85 percent between the third and fourth quarters of 2009.

Griendling adds that his company, DoubleStar, was hired by four new clients in a recent 60-day period, and it has its "largest new business pipeline in the last year and a half."

Freelancers may be in line ahead of staff recruiters, too. "Small to mid-size firms are bringing the search function in-house [by] hiring ex-search consultants to be their in-house recruiter on a contract basis," Nucci says.


A New Model

Another strategy being used as companies try to do more with less: Many are asking hiring managers and employees to take on more staffing responsibilities. Some experts believe this trend could continue for some time, so even after some semblance of a professional recruiting operation is restored, veteran staffing professionals may not recognize it.

"The hiring manager will no longer just be the end of the road for hiring decisions, but also the person identifying talent," Finnigan says.

"Hiring managers, although not experts in recruiting, will be forced to be," Salmon agrees.

Also taking on more recruiting tasks, according to Salmon, are ordinary employees in other departments. "Responsibility for recruiting has been pushed out into the organization," she says.

Finnigan calls it a whole-company approach to recruitment. "Employees will be called upon to make referrals and publicize jobs. Even executives will need to be on the front lines. … Referral hiring is the nirvana of recruiting," but it’s not easy. So, he says, companies are asking employees to tap into their personal online social networks. Instead of posting and advertising job listings, businesses are seeing if they can get their first round of applicants through referrals.

What is lost with this strategy, Salmon notes, "is the expertise in recruiting, particularly the recruiting of passive candidates" by staffing experts who have built their own, focused networks and developed the skills to manipulate them efficiently.

Using professional recruiters is still "the best way to find the right people," Salmon says.


Recruiting Recruiters, Finally

Eventually, organizations will become too lean. "Once it gets to that point, companies are going to realize that their people are working 24/7 and are maxed out on productivity," Craighead says. "When people scream and say, ‘I can’t take it anymore,’ they will have to hire."

He adds, however, that businesses are unlikely to rehire experienced recruiters back to pre-recession levels. "Companies will act cautiously in rehiring them," he says.

Finnigan concludes that companies are going to hire recruiters eventually, but not until after a lot of other things happen. "When you see that spike, you’ll know we’re in a recovery," he says.

In recovery, Finnigan predicts, the recession will leave a sharpened emphasis on the bottom line. "Before companies are going to build up recruiting staffs, they’re going to ask for the [return on investment] in doing so. … Before HR will get approval to hire more recruiters, they will have to answer the question, how much money must we spend?"

______________________________________

Steve Taylor’s most recent article for Staffing Management magazine, “Sometimes More Is More,” appeared in the October-December 2009 issue.
______________________________________

Reprinted with permission from the Society of Human Resource Management (SHRM) for inclusion July 15 - September 15, 2010. Taylor, Steve. "The Return of Recruiters". May 5, 2010. Accessed online at http://www.shrm.org/Publications/StaffingManagementMagazine/EditorialContent/Pages/0410taylor.aspx on July 15, 2010.

Make Your Vendors Prove Their Quality of Hire Claims


Author: Lou Adler | Lou Adler | ERE Articles
Date: C
Views: 4

Over the past several months I've been advocating a strategic view of the recruiting function based on quality of hire as the metric of choice. In case you missed any of the missives, here's a quick summary of what some would contend are blasphemous repudiations of the recruiting department of yesteryear.



  1. Cost per hire is a misguided metric that is at best useless, and at worst, can harm the organization. While tracking costs and spending wisely is essential, to divide that cost by the number of hires makes no sense. Instead, track costs in total and focus on reducing them if you're not hiring as many people, or you can prove an improvement in productivity without a degradation in quality. Reducing quality while reducing costs is a strategic mistake for the sake of a tactical gain.

  2. The HR/recruiting department must take company-wide responsibility for quality of hire. Forget the mantra of shared responsibility. If some line manager blows the hiring decision, who has to clean up the mess and find a replacement? While HR/recruiting doesn't make the hiring decisions, it needs to make sure that the proper decisions are made. This is comparable to finance owning the budgeting and investment analysis process. Finance doesn't spend the money, but it makes sure the money is spent wisely. Having an audit function in place to validate that the right hiring decisions were made is one way to make sure the process is adhered to.

  3. Measure quality of hire on a financial basis. The financial benefit of hiring someone in the top third vs. the bottom third is at least twice the compensation of the person. (Here's a recording of a recent webinar with a handout including the actual calculations for this.) This benefit is due to increased productivity, less management effort, higher-quality work, and far less turnover.

  4. Calculate the ROI of any new recruiting or sourcing initiative on an ROI basis. To do this, figure out how many people you'll be hiring in the top-third instead of the bottom-third. (Email me if you want to walk through this calculation.) If the minimum financial impact of a top-third person is two times his or her compensation, it's pretty easy to figure the gross financial gain of this. Compare this to the cost to obtain the gain in order to determine the ROI of the program.


I'd like to add a fifth topic to this list of quality of hire maxims: make your vendors prove quality of hire improvements before you spend any money. No one should be excluded, whether it's a new ATS or investing in web 2.0 social media or whatever product-of-the-month comes along. If it doesn't improve quality of hire on an ROI basis, don't waste your time or money.


Proving a quality of hire improvement is no easy thing, but just going through the effort will get you to think about it at a strategic level.


For example, talent hubs, prospect pools, CRM, and social media are the current craze, and some actually can improve quality of candidate. However, getting better candidates doesn't mean better hires. I advocate an early-bird sourcing strategy. This means getting candidates before they enter the job-hunting market, or during their first week looking for a new job. This is a huge competitive advantage.


Unfortunately, if you wait a week to call or you make them jump through hoops to talk with someone, you'll lose them. Now add into the mix hiring managers who blow the interview or who can't recruit top performers to join the team. So even if a new program offers better candidates, if your backend processes aren't changed, you won't improve your quality of hire.


To improve quality of hire, consider everything collectively: sourcing, screening, recruiting assessing, and closing. For now, and for the sake of simplicity, let's assume your backend is in great shape, and just consider how you could make your sourcing vendors prove an improvement in quality of candidate. The premise is that if you invest in the vendor's offering, the candidates you'll be seeing are of a superior quality than what you're now seeing or you would see by using some alternative.


The ROI calculation would be performed based on the assumption you'll be hiring more people in the top third than the bottom third. If they can't justify a quality of hire improvement, which is a strategic impact, then you're left with the more tactical approach of using cost savings or productivity enhancements to justify the effort.


With the focus on quality of hire improvements, here are some ways you could get your vendor to validate their programs:



  1. The smell test. The idea behind this is that it doesn't make much sense to conduct any type of rigorous analysis unless the vendor's approach seems logical. For example, one major job board vendor told me at Onrec (Chicago, November 2009) that candidates from her board had lower turnover than from the other major job board for the same job. Not surprisingly, she didn't know why. This fails the smell test. On the other hand, one vendor told me that candidates in their network were more passive than those in the most well-known network since a person couldn't join to get listed. The CEO then went on to say that people could only get listed in their network if they were mentioned at least three times in some independent Internet article. This passes the smell test. Of course, you still have to do the analysis to prove that the candidates are better.

  2. The before and after biggest stack test. Before you decide to consider any vendor, take 100 candidates at random from your current sourcing process and divide them into three piles. Pile A is comprised of those you absolutely would consider in depth. Pile B is filled with the maybes. Pile C is filled with those you wouldn't ever consider. Now measure the height of each stack. In a pilot of some type, take another 100 candidates sourced based on the proposed process and divide them into the A-B-C stacks. If the A stack has increased in height and the C stack has decreased, you're on your way. Now calculate the percent increase in the size of the A stack by the financial impact of each person to determine the total impact. From this you can easily calculate the ROI of the new process. Of course, you could conduct some type of rigorous statistical analysis to validate the results between the two groups, but if the A stack grows significantly, you'll probably get the same result. If you don't want to do this yourself, have your vendor show you the statistical results of other clients they've done this for.

  3. The side-by-side stack test. Using some type of quick pilot test, select 100 candidates at random using the new process and 100 candidates using your current process. This is better than the before-and-after test above, since more things are the same, especially labor market conditions. Now divide the candidates in the A-B-C stacks as above and compare them as before. If the A stack is significantly bigger using the new process, you've got a winner. You can compare competing vendors the same way. Find out who has the biggest stack of A-level candidates.

  4. Use metrics that indirectly measure quality of candidate. This is a variation of the A-B-C stack approach. If you don't need to review as many resumes to find someone worth interviewing, it means you're seeing a higher percentage of better candidates. So start tracking this. Also, track the percent of candidates sent to your hiring managers who are actually interviewed. This is one way to track the quality of your sourcing programs and the quality of your recruiters. Start asking your candidates how long they've been looking. If you're seeing them a few days after they've started looking, it means your advertising is highly visible. Now compare the quality of these people using the A-B-C stack approach to determine if the best people are seeing your ads first.


There are many other ways to measure quality of candidate, but the point is that you should make your vendors prove it before you proceed. This is still just the first step. Even if the vendor has proven a quality of candidate improvement, you still must do at least two more things. First, compare the offering of competing vendors who claim the same quality of candidate improvement doing the same thing. There might be a newer approach that is less costly, more efficient, or more effective.


In this case, go with the vendor that brings in the best candidates most efficiently, rather than most cheaply.


Second, ensure your backend processes, including the interview itself and your hiring managers, are capable of reeling in and hiring stronger candidates. This is where most sourcing programs and new recruiting initiatives fall flat. That's why it's important to consider quality of hire from an end-to-end perspective, not just at the quality of candidate level. If you ignore the rest of the process, you just might wind up with a lot more great people you won't be hiring.


URL: http://www.mntrn.org/modules/planet/view.article.php/2534
Trackback: http://www.mntrn.org/modules/planet/trackback.php/2534

Job Listings / Resumes
Login
Username:

Password:


Lost Password?

Register now!
Current Weather
Minneapolis
Conditions as of
12 minutes ago
overcast
Temp: 70 °F (21 °C)
Rel hum: 78 %
Dewpt: 63 °F (17 °C)
29.97 inHg (1015 hPa) 
Wind increasing
SE at 9.2 mph (4.1 mps)
view forecast