Uncategorized

Should You Be Recruiting Continuously?

mobius stripAccording to a recent survey by CareerBuilder, only 38 percent of employers recruit on an ongoing basis for positions that may open up in the near future, even while some positions sit unfilled for extended periods of time.

And not without reason.  There’s certainly greater cost involved with continual recruiting, both in terms of time and expense otherwise.  But the study, whose respondents included 2,200 hiring managers and HR professionals, has found that the payout associated with recruiting continually pales in comparison to the benefits.

Americas Recruiting Manager for Kelly Services, Kelly Kudola, makes the case for continuous recruitment, asserting that “pipeline management and proactive recruiting will only save time in the back end.”  Recruiting that’s reactive rather than proactive in nature is actually more resource-intensive.

In brief, the survey found that, among HR managers who recruit  continuously:

•  65 percent realized a shortened time to hire

•  54 percent indicated that the tactic reduced their cost per hire

This is huge, given that the cost of extended vacancies can be brutal when it comes to loss in productivity; damage to key performance metrics, such as customer satisfaction and delivery times; and hindrance to growth.  Among those surveyed, 22 percent have vacancies that have gone unfilled for six months or longer.  One answer to this problem can be building and maintaining a talent pipeline.

Josie Huber, Kelly Services’ Director of Recruiting Business Solutions, advises adopting a solution closely customized to your organization’s resources.  Focus on building a talent pool for positions you most often need to fill, sourcing potential hires from internally, externally or both.  But be candid with candidates, she says, letting them know up front if the positions they’re interviewing for aren’t yet open and being as clear as possible about what they can expect.