Having witnessed the life-cycle of ‘In-house Talent Acquisition Team’ hires, it’s ineffectiveness is only now becoming clear. Would you agree?
1 Like
Yes I would
1 Like
Got any clues as to why it is what it is?
Bad incentives? (This probably applies to everything)
1 Like
100% agree.
1 Like
So many reasons. Too many to launch into here but if I were to ‘nutshell’, human psychology.
Basically:
Overall experience:
Company: narrowed, ‘low-hanging fruit’ thinking supported by processes driven recruiting methods. Employee: multiple application process lowering attention to detail in every respect and discouraging high performers who mostly lose the will to continue and log off mid-application.
Outcome: Less impactful output of new hire leading to lower retention rates.
This serves neither company nor employee. Although it’s led to a whole other industry being created to focus on ‘the employee experience’. Requiring a whole other budget allocation.
If only that spend was applied to more effective recruiting activities….
In fact, if someone invented a new business proposition for a professional recruiting consultancy these days, I think it would be very popular…..
The biggest problem with in house hiring for a bank is an issue of hiring the wrong people to cover hiring that should be done by the functions but are too busy to do they instead hire people who know don’t what they are doing while hiring cheaply for people who couldn’t fill positions at the local drive thru.
1 Like