Recruiting: What is the problem? Part 1 – #59
In order to use the management tools and strategies we feature in our weekly BLOGS, we will address the subject of Recruiting as an example to show that asking the four questions listed in BLOG #2, should be part of the process in developing strategies aimed at providing a solution to the identified problem. Many years ago at a Xerox training class I was part of a group of managers from various disciplines who had to identify the four areas correctly. We worked for three days straight and we thought that we had the right solution, only to find out that the question dealing with “what is the problem” revealed a different problem. Therefore, questions 3 & 4 were wrong; we had identified – Who can do something to correct the problem and What can he/she do? 8 Managers with combined Management experience of 150+ years wasted four days of trying to arrive at a solution.
Is There a Problem?
Yes, there is! The following will list today’s top five recruiting challenges:
PwC’s 2017 CEO’S Survey, and the Conference Board’s Annual Survey revealed that the number ONE concern for CEO’S remains hiring talent in all areas of the company business. Businesses have never done as much hiring as they do today. They’ve never spent as much money doing it, and they’ve never done a worse job at it. Why do employers spend so much on something so important while knowing so little about whether it works.
What is the Problem?
The pool of qualified candidates is drying up – due to businesses hiring qualified candidates from each other, driving up costs of hiring non-entry level employees of direct competitors and related industries. Costs on average are around $4129 per job in the US – we fill a staggering 66 million jobs per year with the number continuing to climb as we achieve a lower unemployment number.
The hiring process is implemented by unqualified HR personnel who’s main objective is to make their job easier with stock questions, fancy software and the latest tools that don’t relate to specific job requirements, and who have no idea that each applicant needs to receive the attention that a Customer would receive for the likelihood of them becoming one is very high. Companies whose HR people are not qualified recruiters are continuously doing more damage than good. The latest video and voice recognition technology, body language indicators, classes on using social media and machine learning algorithms all aimed at continuing the evisceration of the hiring manager being involved in the process. 40% of companies have outsourced, much if not all, their hiring to companies that will do the routine and boring work that is needed to come up with a suspect candidate. Yet, even the outsourcing companies only fill 11% of the positions with targeted employees. Now HR has to step aside and enlist Managers to be involved and good at hiring across most levels, because the candidates are already doing the job somewhere else. These people won’t need training, but they are harder to find and will cost more.
Training, development, mentoring and career ladders are things of the past and have been replaced by leaders of whom only 28% feel that internal candidates represent an important source of people to fill vacancies. Retention is a major problem because internal candidates are watching people come in from the outside and making more money than they have been paid for years. Therefore, disgruntled employees are leaving voluntarily, and they will have to be replaced with higher paid.
Only 1/3 of the businesses track key employment measurements to see whether their practices actually produce satisfactory hires. Time to hire, cost per hire, sources yielding best results are directly tied to the ineffectiveness of the HR function. I just witnessed a seven year employee leave voluntarily because management thought she was happy. The minute the existing manager left (voluntarily), he poached her with a much higher wage.