 |
The other day I heard a
VP - HR of a large MNC Bank boast about
the fact that they had put up an Internet
ad and within a day they got 500 responses.
He said that with this kind of a direct
response, he seriously was wondering if
Recruitment firms would be in business for
long...
This got me thinking and the more I thought
about it the more I realized the answer
was not that simple. Recruitment firms were
not mere postmen fetching and sourcing resumes
that they could easily be replaced by an
alternate source or the employer's own team…
They performed a job that had a huge value
perception, not just for employers but also
for candidates that could not be made redundant…
and here are the reasons why:
Off course to begin with - as a direct rebut
to our friend, the VP - HR of the MNC Bank,
I would ask his team (since he obviously
and hopefully would not have the time) to
check how many of the 500 resumes were relevant
to their job specs or the company…
our experience shows that resumes relevant
to the role itself would be a minuscule
percentage of the total applications, and
once you check with these candidates on
interest and fitment on a whole range of
issues, you might not end up with anyone.
Also, seriously - how many of you have taken
a call from a companies HR department, made
directly to you, pitching for a job with
them… If you do, your immediate perception
may be that the company is too small, the
positions too junior or the company not
very professional! Apart from these factors,
if your current company gets to know that
a competitor has been targeting or poaching
it's employees directly, you can just imagine
the consequences… need I say more.
In such situations a "Recruitment Firm"
with a basket of potential firms and opportunities
for a candidate is least threatening.
One frequently comes across candidates who
decline to join a particular firm for a
reason and this candidate may share the
reason with a "Recruitment Consultant",
who in turn can give the feedback to the
firm… but in case the company was directly
calling, you pretty much close the doors
on such genuine feedback.
Candidates also share information freely
with a consultant as they look upto them
for advice. Consultants have a macro picture
of the employment market and the industry
and also have multiple options for a candidate
not just within the same industry but also
across industries. Companies own hiring
team would have limited awareness of potential
opportunities for a candidate except for
within their own firm. Hence a candidate
has a frank and free discussion with a consultant
in a recruitment firm. Candidates share
details that in the normal course they would
not share with a company simply because
the candidate tends to feel that it may
go against their candidature. For example,
genuine reasons for leaving a job, information
on actual salary status vis a vis appraisals
etc are information that are carefully avoided
from potential employers. All information
is measured and disclosed keeping the sentiments
and expectations of the potential employer.
Also, when the time comes after the interview
process for salary discussions, there are
frequent chances of a breakdown in communication
where both the company and the candidate
may feel that their first move would be
interpreted as a sign of giving up and they
may be short changed. In such scenarios
a consultant ensures that he hears both
sides, conveys unbiased views to both sides
and helps them come to a mutually beneficial
win-win decision.
I would also recommend a third party "Recruitment
firm" to be the preferred hiring source
to get independent candidates for a Corporate
especially vis a vis in-house employee referrals
if hiring is happening for critical / senior
/ large number of positions. The reason
being, I have personally seen such referrals
create pockets of influence for people who
refer them especially when the referee also
has a direct or indirect say in the hiring
decision. The reasons for getting such people
on board tend to be political and hence
not in the interest of the company. This
could be extremely harmful for the company
in the long run.
Off course in today's day and age, where
companies focus on core competencies, it's
essential to outsource non-core activities
like recruitments. Not only is a recruitment
firm an expert due to a larger experience
in the field, they have typically exposure
to multi-industry best practices in hiring
apart from access to multiple sources of
hiring which may not be a possible for a
company to replicate.
Lastly, a line function is run more efficiently
and effectively than a staff function. Recruitment
is bread and butter for "Recruitment
Firms" hence this ensures efficiencies,
whereas a corporate recruitment role is
non-revenue generating and hence lacks the
company wide focus to make it as efficient
as an external agency. Moreover if a corporate
recruitment team does not deliver, you cannot
really sack the whole team, whereas another
agency can easily replace a recruitment
firm not performing upto the desired standards.
Finally as with all outsourced functions,
you pay for a hiring agency only when you
need people to hire while your in house
team will have to sit on the bench or will
have to be retrenched the day the company
stops hiring.
Hence all "Recruitment Firms"
can be rest assured that most professional
employers will continue to use their services
for times to come...
|
