Reading through some of the daily LinkedIN updates I came across a highly interesting article, albeit with a very provocative title. “How HR screwed up recruitment” (click bait if ever I saw it, but then it worked on me…).
Nonetheless, the author makes some very valid observations around how to get the best out of external recruiters, and the problems encountered when an automated, multi-agency approach is used for filling professional roles.
The article examines the rise of the procurement driven preferred supplier lists, and hence a major focus on margins – not, of course, the same as value for money. The themes were around looking at the bigger picture of:
• how to hire the best talent for your organisation
• getting full engagement with your supplier
• how to ensure you are hiring the best talent,
• how to ensure that your external recruiters work hard to source the right calibre of candidates for you.
All struck many chords with me. The Author writes of her own experiences (as both an external recruiter and working in house in the HR field) that one of the better agencies would have previously worked on 3 jobs to be able to place one of them, and that ratio now needs to be 10 jobs worked on for one placement. She comments “How focused on quality shortlists are they with 30 candidates to find, motivate and keep warm for just one fee?”
Of course, the vast change brought about by technology advances has greatly assisted in many ways, and in the ‘volume’ recruitment sector there exists now a much greater ability to bring that recruitment in house. In the professional services sector the benefits are much less significant and to apply the same approach is fundamentally flawed.
With the more relationship driven approach the author outlines that the client and candidate experience is much better, and the result generally more thought out, rather than a multi agency “throw a lot of mud and see what sticks” approach. Why not read the article and let me know what you think.