The purpose of the UK Recruiter discussion board
is to give recruiters the opportunity to discuss issues relating to their jobs
and the recruitment industry in the UK.
Whilst providers of goods and services to the
industry are welcome to partake in the discussions they should not use this
forum for advertising.
Please read and adhere to the board's guidelines which you will see when you click to "start new topic"
|
| Reply To This Thread |
| Re: In House Recruitment |
| Author: | Ruffski |
| Date: | Tuesday, 13th Jan 2009 14:05 |
| Views: | 51 (excluding Digests and RSS feeds) |
| Category: | Other | | URL: | http://web.ukrecruiter.co.uk/forum/Forum/read.php?i=170393 |
|
Hi Andy,
You've posed a really good but difficult to answer question here!
After a great deal of thought / soul searching, I guess the answer would depend on the skills and flexibility of the in-house recruiter.
Companies who in-house recruiters tend (In my experience) to be fairly large and diverse organisations, meaning that their resourcing function may be responsible for resourcing a wide range of skills. Some skills like IT and Engineering are actually fairly difficult to find for people who have not previously supplied to or worked in these industries making this a difficult proposition for in-house consultants without backgrounds in these areas. A good in-house recruiter must be adaptable, flexible and able to work across a number of very different sectors, otherwise I'd suggest they will be at fairly high risk of losing their jobs as agencies start offering better value for money to win business in this climate.
Hope this made some sense! I know what I'm trying to say, but have had some difficulty in putting it in writing today! Maybe I'm having a senior moment!
Good luck!
Ruffski |
|
| Reply To This Thread |
| Re: In House Recruitment |
| Author: | Greig |
| Date: | Tuesday, 13th Jan 2009 14:48 |
| Views: | 45 (excluding Digests and RSS feeds) |
| Category: | Other | | URL: | http://web.ukrecruiter.co.uk/forum/Forum/read.php?i=170393 |
|
Andy - It's an interesting question and as Ruffski says it's a difficult one to answer because of the diversity of the industry. Some sectors are suffering badly, others are continuing to grow. It's down to the individual companies to do the maths based on their recruitment plans over the next year or so. I guess part of it depends on the roles you're planning to recruit for compared against the background of your in-house recruiters.
If they're planning on cutting back I can see it being beneficial for some companies to lose their in-house recruiters and pass searches over to agency recruiters.
Sorry for the vague answer!
Greig
TalentRevolt - UK IT and Engineering split fee recruitment exchange - http://www.talentrevolt.com |
|
| Reply To This Thread |
| Re: In House Recruitment |
| Author: | Mitch |
| Date: | Wednesday, 14th Jan 2009 13:33 |
| Views: | 42 (excluding Digests and RSS feeds) |
| Category: | Other | | URL: | http://web.ukrecruiter.co.uk/forum/Forum/read.php?i=170393 |
|
I think the inhouse market will shed some jobs ...especially as far too many inhouse recruiters just use agencies anyway and are little more than glorified recruitment administrators. This will leave some space for some agencies to develop stronger relations with these companies and continue to make placements.
I happen to think that there is a huge opportunity for recruitment agencies to extend themselves beyond just offering a simple transactional service. I believe that the current market offers some of the better agencies the chance to help some of their clients achieve greater self-sufficiency in how they attract candidates and fill jobs by actually taking ownership of all or part of their recruitment and training these clients in how to build their own genuine inhouse recruitment function rather than the largely ineffectual inhouse function many of these companies have at the moment.
That may initially be seen as short-term, because you're essentially teaching the client how to not need agencies (or at least drastically reduce their reliance on them) ...but the consultancy fees that would be generated, would far exceed what that agency would have billed to that client in placements fees over the same 1 to 2 year period.
There is probably no one better to help a company with a regular external recruitment need to build an internal recruitment agency ethic than a good recruitment agency that understands both sales and delivery.
It just takes a different mindset.
Historically, recessions also provide lots of opportunities for those people who can spot new trends and think a little differently.
|
|
| Reply To This Thread |
| Re: In House Recruitment |
| Author: | Liz |
| Date: | Wednesday, 14th Jan 2009 14:35 |
| Views: | 48 (excluding Digests and RSS feeds) |
| Category: | Other | | URL: | http://web.ukrecruiter.co.uk/forum/Forum/read.php?i=170393 |
|
|
Like the way you think there Mitch and we offer more than just standard recuritment solutions to clients. Where they don't have an inhouse team we interview alongside them (sometimes they prefer us to their HR/Internal recruitment, which isn't a great sign). |
|
| Reply To This Thread |
| Re: In House Recruitment |
| Author: | Bob |
| Date: | Wednesday, 14th Jan 2009 15:46 |
| Views: | 42 (excluding Digests and RSS feeds) |
| Category: | Other | | URL: | http://web.ukrecruiter.co.uk/forum/Forum/read.php?i=170393 |
|
Interesting point, but isn't that business model basically an RPO?
A number of agencies have used this model, I have recruited through RPOs to a number of FTSEs and have found the service many RPOs provide to be no better than in in-house recruitment teams?
A better result as I see it would be agencies forming sole supplier agreements but retaining their distance from the company. From my experience I prefer to have good relationships with businesses but not to be tied into them commercially. |
|
| Reply To This Thread |
| Re: In House Recruitment |
| Author: | Ruffski |
| Date: | Wednesday, 14th Jan 2009 16:22 |
| Views: | 51 (excluding Digests and RSS feeds) |
| Category: | Other | | URL: | http://web.ukrecruiter.co.uk/forum/Forum/read.php?i=170393 |
|
@ Bob
Some of us RPO providers do provide far higher levels of service and understanding than in-house recruitment teams. I was lucky enough to be awarded a significant RPO contract with one of the UK's largest engineering companies around 18 months ago and the difference we have made to the clients recruitment process and ultimately their staffing levels has been astounding. The big differences between our RPO model and others I'm aware of is:
1) We, in hand with our client educate our PSL in the types of positions they are asked to recruit for (Do you know what a safety case engineer does? Our PSL partners were not actually that confident prior to the class room sessions despite having significant caliber in the sector we supply) This improved knowledge has lead to a great improvement in quality of applications, and I also feel that the quantity of applications has grown alongside this. Is it fair to expect a recruiter to fully understand the roles they are asked to fill without allowing them the opportunity to meet the end clients managers and question them?
2) We introduced on-site recruitment and resource management teams who have different functions, but effectively give the client an in-house team, albeit one who works for a recruitment business partner (The RPO)
3) Where particular sites have differing needs, our on-site recruitment team have backgrounds in these industries, thus greatly increasing their understanding of the clients needs and the wider market
Ultimately, the teams are supported by a carefully selected recruitment supply chain, without whom we'd struggle to fulfill the clients needs, but it's important that this supply chain is managed by people who really understand the drivers, behaviors and needs of recruitment agencies. RPO's can work if set-up and operated correctly in an open and honest manner. In-house teams are great, but I firmly believe that what we offer is a good deal better as we can flex to the clients business needs, expanding our teams where necessary with the skills which will make a positive difference. The real proof of the pudding will be when it's time to extend or renew the contract. |
|
| Reply To This Thread |
| Re: In House Recruitment |
| Author: | Ruffski |
| Date: | Wednesday, 14th Jan 2009 16:32 |
| Views: | 28 (excluding Digests and RSS feeds) |
| Category: | Other | | URL: | http://web.ukrecruiter.co.uk/forum/Forum/read.php?i=170393 |
|
Sorry Bob, just one more point to make:
Sole Supplier accounts don't tend to be that successful as the sole supplier's interests are often placed before the end clients interests. In addition to this Sole Suppliers are not often capable of delivering all the needs of a diverse organisation, it's better for the client to have the best possible agencies for each area of their business addressing there requirements. I previously worked for the engineering division of a large national agency. The engineering division won a sole supplier account with a major utilities company. Before long the engineering recruitment team was being asked to fill secretarial and IT jobs, despite the other group companies being specialists in these areas. The MD of the engineering division wanted all the profits and wasn't prepared to allow other group companies to work on the vacancies generated by his business. Needless to say, the clients vacancies took longer to fill and the engineering division quickly lost all focus on the engineering market. I left at this point. I've displaced this company on 3 separate occasions in the past few years as they are no longer good at engineering recruitment, but are now filling more secretarial roles, despite having the word engineering in their name! |
|
| Reply To This Thread |
| Re: In House Recruitment |
| Author: | Mitch |
| Date: | Thursday, 15th Jan 2009 12:01 |
| Views: | 44 (excluding Digests and RSS feeds) |
| Category: | Other | | URL: | http://web.ukrecruiter.co.uk/forum/Forum/read.php?i=170393 |
|
Bob, what I was talking about wasn't re-packaged RPO ...more like an insourcing service. RPO firms are typically too driven by recruitment cost than candidate quality.
What I am talking about is a temporary outsourcing of the inhouse function ...if that makes any sense? This means genuine recruitment consultancies (that are consultative in their business style and who have real recruitment expertise) who help the client build a powerful and proactive inhouse recruitment function over a 1 to 2 year period.
That way the client gets an inhouse recruitment process and team that is ballsy and commercial rather than the apologetic recruitment functions they currently have that is being driven by flakey ex recruiters and/or HR generalists. An inhouse recruitment team should be no different to that same companies inhouse specialist sales people.
I think the better companies will one day start to put recruitment in their sales and marketing departments rather than HR, who would only get involved in the onboarding stuff.
But, like many agencies also, the real key is in hiring the right people to do the inhouse recruiting and paying them the right amount of money.
I see so many companies complaining about how difficult recruitment is and how expensive it is ...but scared of doing anything about it ...which is why they end up being at the mercy of agencies.
|
|
| Reply To This Thread |
| Re: In House Recruitment |
| Author: | Andy |
| Date: | Friday, 16th Jan 2009 16:48 |
| Views: | 45 (excluding Digests and RSS feeds) |
| Category: | Other | | URL: | http://web.ukrecruiter.co.uk/forum/Forum/read.php?i=170393 |
|
Thanks everyone for your replies, plenty to mull over it seems!
I guess it all boils down to the same as it always does, who can provide the best service to a client whether they be agency or in-house. |
|
| Reply To This Thread |
| Re: In House Recruitment |
| Author: | Wotabout |
| Date: | Friday, 16th Jan 2009 19:00 |
| Views: | 50 (excluding Digests and RSS feeds) |
| Category: | Other | | URL: | http://web.ukrecruiter.co.uk/forum/Forum/read.php?i=170393 |
|
Andy - if you have an HR or other qualification to back you up and you can prove how you are saving money or improving quality - adding to company bottom line then you may be OK.
Ruffski et al - RPO/managed service/sole supplier issues - doesnt your work depend on factors such as volume *cost effective for both client and agency), ease of fill, sector, client mindset whether your solution is best.
Agree with Ruffski that internal recruiters can get sidetracked by the org politics and end up as rec administrators but it depends on the ability of the recruiter to demonstrate their worth and make a difference.
As an internal recruiter my viewis keep it simple, provide right skills, at the right time at the right price and quality. Call me a control freak I prefer to keep third party suppliers to a minimum.
I do use agency, job boards etc - I have found that an agency is only as good as the individual consultant/s working on your behalf. Sorry to say there are consultants who have no understanding, interest or insight of the sector or customer they are supplying. Spray and pray of CVs won't work in this climate. I will pay for a service that offers pre-qualified, well matched, reliable results.
There is enough business and work for us all if we focus on what we are good at and play to our strengths. |
|
| Reply To This Thread |
| Re: In House Recruitment |
| Author: | Ruffski |
| Date: | Monday, 19th Jan 2009 09:50 |
| Views: | 51 (excluding Digests and RSS feeds) |
| Category: | Other | | URL: | http://web.ukrecruiter.co.uk/forum/Forum/read.php?i=170393 |
|
Hi Wotabout,
Yes, I agree that our proposition is based on volume and cost efficiencies to ourselves, our PSL and our client. Thankfully working in the nuclear and defence sectors, the volume is still there and doesn't appear to be subject to cuts (at this time) I do also agree that In-house recruiters are the most effective recruitment tool for clients who don't have the type of volume we're recruiting (300 to 400 vacancies per annum) provided the In-house recruiter is capable, organised and willing to work with recruiters in an open, helpful and honest manner. I wholly agree that there is a place for all of us (Recruiters/RPO's/Job Boards/In-house recruiters) and lets be honest, from time to time all need each others assistance to get the job done properly.
Final point, you are correct about the effectiveness of recruitment consultants, agencies can claim to be the best in their sector, but it's very much dependent upon whether their recruiters are capable as to whether this claim stands up. Sadly there are a lot of bigger agencies who employ kids from call center backgrounds as 'recruiters' which is both devaluing us real recruiters and giving recruitment agencies a bad name. You don't tend to find this in the smaller, boutique agencies hence I feel these companies are so needed in the current recruitment market place. |
|
| Reply To This Thread |
Please note: The reply form is not showing because the posting is older than six months or the thread is locked. Please start a new topic or contact the forum administrator.
|
| -->
|
|
