Groups
Recruiting Leadership Forum Discussions « back to group
-
Hello,
We are looking to realign our current recruitment model and I was hoping some of my corporate colleagues might be able to provide me with some documentation in regard to what their current recruitment model looks like? I am looking for at creating a implementing a sourcing model function within our process and have the following questions?
Do you have a corporate model/document outining the roles of each person in the recruitment process. ie: recruiter,sourcer, administrative person? Are all levels of recruiters supported by a research/sourcing team. What is the ratio of researcher/sourcer to recruiter What is the req load per recruiter or per sourcer? Would you have job descriptions with qualifications and responsibilities for the different team members to share What does your administrative support model look like.
All thoughts our appreciated, thanks.
23 replies
Log in or register to post a reply.
-
Susan, what a considerate way of handling the seemingly incessant vendor responses you receive!
I'll be sure to send you an email! LOL!
Best wishes
-
Joshua, that's a great question. Most leave voicemails describing themselves and their business and ask for time to talk. It's too hard to differentiate between calls that I may be interested in and those I am not with short messages and long messages take too much time to listen to. I actually added a line to my voicemail message asking vendors to send me an email to describe their offering rather than leave a message. I wish there was a better way because we (corporate) needs their (vendor) services. We just need a better way to evaluate and respond.
I will definitely connect with Deloitte, thanks for the suggestion.
-
Colleen, I would first start with understanding your current state and then define your desired state. Metrics are tricky without valid historical information. The best model I built was at an IT Consulting Firm. ( You will notice I stay away from the term "best practices".) We re-started at ground zero and worked up. 1) Developed recruiting process that was consistant across the organization. This meant "buy in" from Top executives and regional executives/management 2) Developed a holistic sourcing strategy that allowed for a consistant flow of candidates creating a proactive recruiting environment. 3) Developed targeted goals for Cost Per Hire and Cost of Acquisition after determining the current costs. 4) Developed targeted goals for Time to Hire after understanding current Time to Hire 5) Established the understanding of current recruiter capacity and maximum recruiter capacity ( Number of interviews/hires)
You will also need to know some information to build your candidate load model such as: a) How many qualified resumes are reviewed prior to the initial interview b) How many candidates are interviewed prior to final offer. ( also include how many interviews take place) c) How many candidates accept offers/reject offers
There are some ratios that have not changed in the past 20 years in releation to number of interviews to number of hires. Typically you see 5 to 1. High demand skill sets are different and can be lower.
The above information will get you on your way to establishing some level of measurement for recruiting past , present and future. You can always have market changes like a decreasing talent/candidate pool, increases in market salaries for certain positions, Salary caps within your organization, outdated career matrix's.Usually the CFO is only concerned with $$$. If you have the right info it is easier to build a stronger team with his/her blessing or get additional funding for growth.
I hope this helps you. There are several others who will also offer good advice on this blog. All I can give you is examples that were successful at other organizations. Each organization is different.
Good Luck,
John Bedsole CMS
-
My current client and I are looking for imput on how to measure recruiting success. Anyone able to share best practices on recruiting measures? I'm also looking for coorporate cost per hire info.
Colleen
-
Susan, 17 calls - ouch, I don't know anyone (anyone!) that would like that many vendor calls.
Again, wow! For the record, I was not one of those calls, and frankly, I think there's a balance between opportunistic and tenacious. Of course, it's the sales culture that leads to so many calls, and without sales, 99% of commercial companies wouldn't exist.
Let me ask: How did any of these vendors differentiate themselves? My experience is that most vendors have the same 'pitch', maybe with a word or 2 changed. Either that, or their competitive differentiator is something that matters to them, but is meaningless to you!
What I would honestly recommend against is a conversation outside of "best practices". I say that because today's practices are not 'best practices' . . . they are just 'current practices'.
The person I would recommend speaking with is Rob Mcintosh . . . just keep in mind that Deloitte's structure is likely highly different than your own. That being said, he's a wealth of knowledge - when I found out he was providing garden gnomes to recruiters that made placements from candidates generated by the Candidate Dev Team, I knew he was a cut above in the current Sourcing Leader community. It sounds funny, but is indicative of a business acumen that goes way beyond the numbers and meaningless metrics-du-jour.
-
Rob makes a great point--I think vendors and corporate leads often assume what a conversation might be. That said, having once been a consultant myself, I can see both sides. My original viewpoint regarding a corporate-only call was to benchmark what I call the "what-is". Before we can, or anyone can innovate, you have to take an inventory of "what is" out there. The difficulty with consultants is they often can't share the details (company name, revenues etc.) and when they can, they can't give me the what happened afterwards--the true lessons learned from having lived through the implementation.
I love the viewpoints of consultants and vendors; they are, truly valuable. But I also don't have time (nor does anyone else) for multiple one-on-one calls with multiple consultants I know little about. So a corporate-only call would provide some states of the union if you will of current corporate models and situations as well as some recommendations of consultants or vendors to investigate for next steps.
Rob is also dead-on about the trust issue. I got 17 cold calls, yes, 17, last week from vendors. And I hate not being able to call them all back (b/c I don't want to be rude). But truly from a time perspective, I just can't.
-
Having been in the professional recruitment space for a decade now, I'm amazed how cyclical it is. Agency after agency follows and endless treadmill of total consultant end-to-end recruiting, followed by splitting into consulting and resourcing, maybe splitting off business development out as well, before combining them all 18 months later in a 'new' model.
When I ran a resourcing function in 2001, I was very keen on the notion that the web was now so sophisticated that resourcing would always be separate: I hear people saying that now.
Given the turnover in agencies, maybe this is a reaction to the skills of the people on the ground. Does the same apply top the corporate world.
It seems that each innovation is just the same fashion coming back. This year 70's style shirts were big in Australia. Next year it could be '80's style recruiting!
What might break the cycle for both corporate and recruiter-based talent acquisition will be the rise of the individual contract recruiter. You could run a million dollar business from an Internet caf� these days if you have the talent and dedication. No processes. No rules. Paid on results. It's a brave new world!
-
Joshua - I think you have hit on one of those topics that people have historically kept to the back room.
??"Corporate Leaders feeling nervous about a dialog with vendors for fear of being sold"
I had this very conversation with a recruiting leader who turned consultant a few years back and clearly there are some fences that need to be mended on both sides of the house. If we are to create a non pressure environment when mutual sharing can be more effectively facilitated, thus allowing corporate leaders to proactive engage Vendors/Consultants vs. feeling that they are going to be solicited if publicly say they have a need/want, then some things need to change??Of course, we can flip this discussion to the other side of the equation and say there are a lot of corporate leaders that take advantage of the consultant/vendor, thus not creating and environment of trust as well.
Just a small non random Monday thought
Rob
-
Jennifer, I can see your point,somewhat, on being on corporate talent acquisition only on the call. It maybe that you have had a bad experience with consultants and I have known many myself. However, based upon the posts, it seems that several companies are looking for other options that "may" come from ex-corporate, recruiting consultants and process consultants. My experience is all of the above (Corporate National Recruiting Director, Recruiting Manager, Director of Recruiting as well as being a consultant) and can bring some experience in what works and what doesn't. There are others that have similar experience. Recruiting is in a change mode at present and looking to re-use the same wheel that another company uses may not be the the best solution. By including industry experts from Corporate Recruiting and Consulting, you will gain a greater base of ideas. I don't know that agency types will have much to say as they are not as familiar with the internal workings of a corporate environment As I have said in earlier posts, no two companies have the same culture, needs, resources ect. To me the objective is to gleam ideas, metrics, processes and methodologies that you may apply to your particular situation.
Once gain this is my opinion, you may or may not agree. Hopefully, a call can be arranged and you will have an opportunity to resolve or at least improve your recruiting situation from the information presented on the call.
-
Good morning, All - after observing a somewhat 'interesting' trend, I wanted to take a brief moment to comment on the repeated requests for 'corporate-only'.
For a disclaimer, trust me that I understand the guarding against being continuously sold. It's the same exact scenario for me as well. Every time I turn around, there's a new product, service, or solution being presented to me.
That being said, I would encourage Directors of Talent Acquisition to be careful of the exact opposite. I wrote a blog post the other day about "Blindly Worshipping At The Altar of Best Practices", and I would caution Talent Acquisition professionals against doing so.
We are in the early throws of a function that does not (yes, does not) have a seat at the executive table for a number of reasons. One of them is because there is a bias that the best and brightest do not man the TA or HR function. A portion of that stigma is due to TA professionals blindly following the 'best practice' or fad of the day, not because it stands to enhance overall organizational performance, but because it stands to improve otherwise myopic objectives (i.e. those specific to departmental performance only).
A perfect example is an overview of the demand that exists in our space for circa-1930 marketing solutions and 1950s Henry Ford assembly-line recruiting process improvement. Despite having more information about our customer segments (candidate pools, if you will) than any other business function (yes, including marketing), we continue to operate with outdated and archaic philosophies.
There is a great deal to be learned from great business minds outside solely the HR and TA functions. I would encourage all of us to read more of Malcom Gladwell, Tom Peters, Peter Drucker, Seth Godin, or anyone else that piques your curiosity.
I know some former CEOs of F500 companies and current VPs of Marketing that would absolutely blow us away with their 'outside-the-bubble' insights and observations. Please, please, keep an open mind and don't put up immediate blinders because the point of view or paradigm isn't directly from someone in HR, Talent Acquisition, or Organizational Development. Again, please keep an open mind - it's the only way to leapfrogging our current state of growing innefficiencies. We're smarter than Upper Mgmt gives us credit for . . . but it all starts with us recognizing and embracing that fact.
Joshua Letourneau Mg Dir, SSF (Strategic Sourcing Framework) LG & Assoc Search / Talent Strategy BLOG: www.lgexec.typepad.com
-
Jim,
I would be very interested in participating in a call as well, and agree that it would be helpful to somehow limit the participation in a conference call to people who are directly responsible for the talent acquistion function within their organizations.
Great thread!
Jennifer Miller, PhD Director, Talent Acquisition & Talent Management Sibley Hospital
-
I would be willing to participate as well in a call on the subject. Too many times I have worked with companies to clean up a mess created by someone without the knowledge to execute the recruiting model and strategy. It is much more indepth than taking a recruiting/sourcing template and running with it. The end result is a broken process with "failed" stamped on it. The process did not fail, the execution of the process failed. I agree whole heartedly that Hr and Recruiting should be separated. That is the toughest sell and must come from the top down. Please contact me at jbedsole-at-cmsmanagedrecruiting.com if you would like any additional input for the agenda.
-
I like the idea of a call, but to be perfectly honest, I would love to have a corporate-only call. After my last post, I received a number of emails from vendors and consultants. Having been a consultant before I appreciate the proactivity, and kindness from those who reached out to me.
But if we choose to use consultants it would be months/a year from now. I'm really in the data gathering stage just looking at what other companies have done from the perspective of the corporate leader who implemented the model and has seen its success long after the consultant has gone.
-
Jim,
I agree with the need to map the current process and move from there. I'm a firm believer in "one size does not fit all". I've been a consultant for 13 years and every organization has needed a different process and different tools for different reasons. Much to my chagrin, there has only been one company that has been able to get ahead of the curve and that was primarily because the CEO was very sales oriented and separated recruiting from HR and which allowed recruiting to fully function as a sales/marketing organization with only input from HR.
HR has to be there as a business partner to ensure compliance, but not matter what...DO NOT THINK RECRUITING AND HR BELONG TOGETHER. (If anyone thinks they do belong together, then have HR report to Recruiting and see how much sense that makes.)
Once HR is in an advisory role, that removes the shackles from recruiting and a team with a few key people who transitioned from sales and marketing into recruiting should be competent enough to move your organization forward. Most of what needs to be done is common sense and fluid enough to change.
One observation: Sourcers are typcially undervalued and a pecking order develops between them and recruiters. This can be extremely antiproductive. I would look at creating a model where the positions are equal and interchangeable. Sourcing is a real skill and is not an entry level role. (It's far easier to learn what to do with a candidate once you have one than to actually have to *find* one.)
I have a number of models but can not share. "Proprietary" is stamped all over them. However, I would also love to participate in a call. I would love to steal, er, I mean hear more ideas.
- Leslie
Leslie Morgan Executive Consultant Recruitment Process Insourcing
-
Is there any interest in getting an informal group together on the phone and perhaps a webex to talk about the recruiting model challenges?
I think the forum is great, but there's no replacement for the group dynamic of a live meeting or speaking. Scheduling is another animal altogether.
As suggested in other posts, the models can vary to some degree, yet the ultimate goal of finding and hiring great people is consistent.
As Rob from Deloitte suggests, there are a lot of people rowing this boat, how you avoid going in circles is the key - just pulling on an oar without direction doesn't get you where you need to go.
Let me know if there's any interest in setting up a group call on this topic and I'll throw together an agenda and logistics. We might even be able to leverage a quick informal survey to see who's using CRM, ATS, and the various recruiting models.
Thanks.
Patrick Foss ThinkTalent 952-934-6538 pfoss@thinktalent.net www.thinktalent.net
-
I'd be intrested in getting any info --I also would like to set up a sourcing function for my hospital system.
-
I'd be intrested in getting any info --I also would like to set up a sourcing function for my hospital system.
-
Jim - I am happy to have a chat on this one given I sleep, eat and breathe setting up and driving a corporate sourcing function over the last 5+ years. I can probably share some documentation as well without giving away the corporate IP since I have most of the info you are after.
Give me a call if interested, and we can organize a brief chat as I am always happy to collaborate with others who have to end up rowing in the same boat as me :-)
Rob
Rob McIntosh US Sourcing Lead Deloitte Services, LP Tel: (or Direct :) +1 770-755-1868 Mobile: + 1 770-377-8397 Fax: +1 404 443-9392 romcintosh@deloitte.com www.deloitte.com
-
I have had the pleasure of meeting with some true leaders on the corporate side in this area (Miller Brewing, Nike, Allergan, Cap Gemini, etc.). One consistent observation is that their models look a lot like a disciplined sales and marketing function. Some examples of that are:
1) Segmentation - segmenting the recruiting process and segmenting "customers" - jobs (hiring managers) and candidates 2) Hiring recruiters with a "sales bio-type" and compensating and supporting them accordingly. 3) Measurement/Analytics - bringing in front office metrics that tie in top line numbers to hiring performance (i.e. how does hiring directly impact revenue) and viewing those metrics in real time (dashboards or scorecards), not at month, quarter, or year end when you can't make an impact. 4) Technology - while the ATS is a necessary system, these leaders have brought in prospecting contact management tools (often referred to as a recruiting CRM) that allow for high-volume contact management, cold calling management, mass emailing, etc.
Last point that might be interesting is that all of these individuals came from executive search backgrounds. Not that this is a prerequisite of course, but I say that because I don't think it's pure coincidence. When recruiting IS your business and IS your revenue (and you play in a crowded, competitive sandbox everyday), the market forces you to get very smart about how you conduct your business.
Feel free to contact me directly at mike@avature.net or 503-334-0834 if you want to discuss more or have any specific questions about some of the many leading corporate models I've seen.
Mike
-
Do you have a corporate model/document outining the roles of each person in the recruitment process. ie: recruiter,sourcer, administrative person? Are all levels of recruiters supported by a research/sourcing team. What is the ratio of researcher/sourcer to recruiter What is the req load per recruiter or per sourcer? Would you have job descriptions with qualifications and responsibilities for the different team members to share What does your administrative support model look like.
Jim, I am a little confused on your goals as you are part of an existing and functioning recruiting element. I will lend you my opinion and I am sure others will express their experiences.
Having consulted and created sourcing models and developed several "World Class" Corporate Recruiting teams you need to: 1) Map the existing process 2) Look for overlap, issues that are not legally defendable, elements that are repeatable. 3) Determine your headcount for the next year, growth + attrition. Attrition is historical so you can use a % number in the equation. 3) Determine your cost per hire and your cost of acquisition. ( These are different costs and you need to know what they are in relation to position type, geographic location, skill level ect). Include everytrhing but the kitchen sink in your cost per hire model - recruiter salaries, job boards, office space, computers, telephone costs, bonuses. 4) Determine where your "hires" are derived and which recruiters have hidden specialties. 5) Determine where your recruiting efforts are in relation to a known scale ( CMM, BPR, Six Sigma). CMM works best for recruiting. (I have the metrics if you need them.) Also, take a historical look at your recruiting team team to derive the average number of hires per month your team is capable of producing. 6) Based upon the information above you can determine the roles of the recruiting team and begin to build a sourcing strategy.
Without more detail, I could only give you a template on building a sourcing strategy. The number of hires that the current team is capable of producing vs the number of sourcers vs the number of hires will give you a load model to build the sourcing strategy. This sounds like it wil take a long time to accomplish but it can be done very quickly. I have included a link to the JIT recruiting model as a template for you. http://www.cmsmanagedrecruiting.com/cms2032007.html
I hope this has helped, it is hard to take a model from another organization and make it work. Each company has it's on flavor of recruiting.
Good Luck,
John Bedsole President CMS Managed Recruiting Solutions, Inc. www.cmsmanagedrecruiting.com
-
Jim, good morning and congratulations on investigating this step in the maturation of your recruiting model. If I may, I have a few simple recommendations for you:
a. Keep your eye on desired outcomes. The current model of Sourcing 1.0 (Focus on Name-Generation with an Assembly-Line process) has not yielded desired outcomes. The analogy is how CRM failed to deliver on its original promise as well ("the right message to the right customer at the right time.") Organizations have spent hundreds of millions with little to nothing to show for it.
b. Beware of RPO firms that offer to take over the 'entire' Sourcing process from soup to nuts. This is why I say that: Because all roles within your organization are not of equal importance. I would imagine your goals are to reduce COH and TTF while increasing QOH where it makes the most impact to your organization's strategic objectives and competitive advantage. The analogy here is one of customer segmentation - since all customer segments are not of equal value to an organization, investing equally among all segments will involve a great deal of 'wasted dollars.' (That being said, I would recommend looking into RPO for 'low value, low urgency' roles as the offshore component will allow you to save considerably; it's the highly pivotal, high urgency roles where RPO fails as the ultimate focus is cost reduction, not QOH.)
I did a HCI Webinar on this topic about a week ago and have received quite a few calls as the process I recommend is the next evolution of Sourcing within the Talent Acquisition process. Here is the link:
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=human+capital+institute&sitesearch=
If you'd like to speak more, feel free to drop me a line at jletourneau (at) lgexec.com. Yes, we do offer a SSF (Strategic Sourcing Framework), but I'm not a hard sales guy and will not recommend anything to you that is not in your best interest given your goals.
Joshua Letourneau Mg Director, SSF (Strategic Sourcing Framework) LG & Assoc Search / Talent Strategy BLOG: www.lgexec.typepad.com
-
Jim:
In my experience a recruiting models are unique to each organization as they are structured differently.
A good first step would be to study how your business is aligned and then align your recruiting function to match that. Example: If the business is made up of several business units it may make sense to align the recruiting function to cater to that model if not align it functionally.
Second step would be the actual modeling of the recruiting function which could be augmented by a Sourcing department and/or centralized shared services center (CSSC). You could create a centralized sourcing function that is functionally aligned (Sales, IT, Accounting & Finance etc.) to support your recruiters.
Third step would be have a centralized administrative function to address administrative tasks along the recruiting life cycle, such as scheduling of interviews, offer generation, closing of requisitions etc.
Lastly, you need to incorporate change management initiatives to drive this new model to success.
A lot of other factors such as diversity, campus recruiting, technology and EEO and OFCCP regulations must be taken into consideration before creation or realignment of the recruiting model.
I specialize in proving consulting services in this area and would be more than happy to help you with this endeavor.
Regards, Ravi Subramanian Tel: (630) 605-3466 Fax: (630) 236-3369 ravihome@sbcglobal.net http://www.linkedin.com/in/ravisubramanian
-
I have a similar project as Jim's at Walgreens and wondering the same -- is anyone willing to share some of their models?
Susan D. Strayer, SPHR Director, Talent Management The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, L.L.C. susan.strayer@ritzcarlton.com
-
