In follow up to your request, I drafted a recruitment and selection proposal for your review. The proposed methods for the senior level positions will streamline our processes and align them to the organization’s business strategy.
My proposal includes:
Three recruitment methods.
Three selection methods.
A cost/benefit analysis and comparison of the approaches.
Metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of the ongoing recruitment and selection.
As part of our recruitment and selection strategy, it is very important to assess the candidate’s true interest in our organization and their position within the organization. A bad hiring decision at the senior level can have extensive implications that could impact the direction, strategy and operations of the company causing a negative impact to the company’s bottom line. After you review the proposal, please contact me to coordinate a follow-up discussion.
The purpose of this cost-benefit analysis is to determine which recruitment and selection methods are the best options for HSS to perform for senior level positions.
The following is a brief overview of the methods analyzed in this document.
Internal Recruitment – This is accomplished by choosing among current employees to fill a position that falls vacant over time. It can be achieved by a promotion or a lateral move. Executive Search Firm – This is executed by hiring a recruiting company to research viable candidates working for competitors or related businesses. Social Media – This is executed by coordinating candidate sourcing through social media such as LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter
. Selection Methods
Assessment Centers – A candidate can undergo a series of standardized tests conducted by trained assessors. The exercises may include comprehensive interviews, individual and/or group simulation activities, and work-related performance. A good test would be to ask a potential employee to look at a profit and loss statement and describe how best to increase the sales. The content, instructions, and time allowed must be the same for all candidates. The results would be evaluated by a panel of trained assessors (SHRM). Structured Interviews – Uses a list of predetermined questions. All candidates are asked the same set of situational and/or behavioral questions; however, the follow-up probes may be different. These interviews ensure that similar information will be gathered from all candidates. References – The purpose is to obtain information about the candidate’s behavior and work performance from prior employers that could be critical to our decision.
Internal labor cost for a 6 month timeframe: HR Director & HR Generalist @ 30-40 hours (5-6 hours per week) = $2,200-$3,000 Cost effective, supports positive employee morale and retention, candidate is familiar with the business, provides opportunities for promotions and we can access known past performance.
Executive Search Firm
20% – 30% of first year salary
= $20,000 – $30,000
Reduces time of recruitment, broad range of candidates, can bring new talent/ideas and we can gain knowledge, experience and contacts from recruiter.
Low cost publicity, attracts a variety of workers, directs more traffic to our company’s website and enhances company branding. Selection
Up to $2,000 for each candidate
3 candidates = $6,000
More reliable than traditional testing, reduces charges of political favoritism, they can predict short and long term success and does not produce an adverse impact.
Internal labor cost for a 6 month timeframe: 5 employees @ 10 hours = $2,100 Ensures that similar information will be gathered from all candidates and reduces equity concerns.
Internal labor cost for a 6 month timeframe: HR Generalist @ 20 hours = $529 The supervisor will know the candidate’s work performance and be able to confirm employment and compare similarity of jobs.
Comparative Cost/Benefit Summary
While internal recruitment is the most economical method for recruitment, it is not always the best method. This is good for employee morale; however, we should look externally as well to ensure that we identify the ideal candidate. An external candidate can offer a fresh perspective that would help our organization move to the next level. Executive search firms are expensive; however, they can provide current market intelligence on our competitors. Also, they could deter the risk of litigation if selection decisions prove to be discriminatory. By hiring an external candidate, the employee can take HSS in a different direction by introducing new perspectives. According to Jobvite, a leading recruiting platform, “One of six job seekers polled credited a social network for leading to their current/most recent employment. The goal of using social media as a recruiting tool is to create a buzz about your organization, share stories of successful employees, and tout an interesting culture”. Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and YouTube are excellent places to obtain a media presence to attract a variety of candidates.
Social Media can enhance our employer branding through these tools to attract the most suitable talent by engaging passive job candidates with no external cost. We can capitalize on our reputation to attract large numbers of potential job seekers. If we are able to improve our branding, we can save money on traditional recruiting methods because viable candidates will be asking us to hire them. The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) suggests that organizations should not use social networks as the only recruiting tool because “not every job seeker uses social media”. This could cause adverse impact ” on those who are economically less advantaged, which may correlate with certain racial and ethnic groups”. Structured interviews makes it possible to compare qualifications and reduce equity concerns at low internal costs.
Telephone reference interviews are the best way to get more depth about the candidate’s character and background. “Past performance is the best predictor of future success” (SHRM). Assessment centers can be expensive; however, their tests are more valid because the candidates would be evaluated by many different experts. According to a journal written by Gunderson and Haynes, “Numerous studies have determined that the assessment center method has greater validity for promotion and selection than traditional techniques. Having been developed on the basis of job analysis, it is inherently valid and has proven to be a better indicator of future success than any other tool yet devised”.
Furthermore, if they are easy to defend if challenged due to their fairness and objectiveness. Based on a study by the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL), they stated that “In terms of the organizational needs, when the company was dealing with a cultural or strategic change, executives were more likely to be successful if they were promoted from within rather than hired from the outside”. This is due to the employee’s familiarity with the company and established relationships.
After we implement the new processes, we will evaluate them to ensure that they were cost-effective, timely and, most significantly, that we hired the right employees. Information gathered may be invaluable for further recruiting and to ensure HSS is meeting its goals. There are many metrics to track recruitment results, including the following: Measure the turn-over rate to determine if we have a balance of new employees and experienced staff. Employees leaving in large numbers may indicate that we did not use the right method of recruitment and selection to find the right employee. Measure the cost of turnover – all of the costs associated with replacing a new employee (recruitment costs, selection costs, training costs, etc.). Evaluate the job performance reviews. A good way to measure is to look at the performance evaluations of new employees after the initial 6-month probation period and 1 year anniversary.
Solicit employee feedback on what they thought of the recruitment and selection methods. Getting their measurement data will help us make an informed decision. Ask them if the recruitment and selection methods had any effect on their decision whether to accept the position. Positive feedback indicates a measurement of doing it right. Measure the number of days from the vacancy being posted to the time it was filled. Measure the cost per hire and check to see if we stayed within budget. Measure the number and qualifications of the applicants for the position. Measure the time it took for the new employee to get acclimated to the new position. Selection ratios—the number of a group selected as a percentage of the total number recruited.
Our recruitment and selection process needs to change to adapt to the evolution of technology. We will need to start with an organizational needs assessment to define and assess the work environment (Sessa & Campbell); we can analyze the organization’s strengths, weaknesses, goals and trends. The assessment will help us to develop a profile of our ideal candidate and to construct a valid set of questions to use in our interviews. The next step should consist of reviewing the job description. This will help us to define the job postings. This will also help develop our recruitment strategy. Then we can review the recruitment and selection processes that are listed in the cost and benefit analysis.
I recommend that we use all of the methods that I listed. The costs for contracting an assessment center and an executive search firm may be high; however, I feel that the costs are fair trade-offs, considering the level of the positions. Furthermore, we can hire a contingent executive search firm so we do not have to pay any fees unless we hire the candidate. Each tool is an excellent approach. However, if we diversify our methods, we can have a stronger opportunity in hiring an ideal senior level employee.
Today, our competitors are using a variety of methods to attract the ideal candidate. Since we are a young company and we are projecting that we are going to have more than 200 employees in the next five years, we need to strengthen our recruiting and selection methods for our senior level positions to ensure that we have the right people in place and be at the cutting edge. We can achieve this by implementing all of the methods that I described in my cost/benefit analysis. Hiring the wrong person for the job can be a costly mistake.
Executive Selection A research report on what works and what doesn’t [Review [Title of Reviewed Work], by V. I. Sessa, R. Kaiser, J. K. Taylor, & R. J. Campbell]. (1998). Retrieved September 26, 2014, from http://www.ccl.org/leadership/pdf/research/ ExecutiveSelection.pdf Gunderson, G. J., & Haynes, B. R. (2000). Assessment technology: Its use in improving leadership and management performance. Journal of Extension, 38. Retrieved from http://www.joe.org/joe/2000december/tt1.php Hale, C. (2005, April). Pros and cons of assessment centers. Retrieved September 17, 2014, from http://www.hendonpub.com/resources/article_ archive/results/details?id=3975 Jobvite. Retrieved May 10, 2013, from http://recruiting.jobvite.com/company/press-releases/2012/75-of-american-workforce-is-actively-seeking-or-open-to-new-jobs-jobvite-s-annual-social-job-seeker-survey-reveals/ Recruitment. (2013). In Society for Human Resource
Management (Comp.),Workforce planning and employment (Vol. 2, pp. 164-233). Alexandria, VA: Society for Human Resource Management. Segal, J. A. (2014, September 1). Social Media Use in Hiring: Assessing the Risks. Retrieved September 26, 2014, from SHRM website: http://www.shrm.org/publications/hrmagazine/ editorialcontent/2014/0914/pages/0914-social-media-hiring.aspx#sthash. Hxh35wT5.dpuf