I have been having a few lively discussions with people of late around the topic of hiring. Kevin Wheeler advocates that the hiring managers should be responsible for the recruitment function rather than HR, as they are in a better position to know the role, the skills and the types of people best suited to the position. This seems to be a logical point.
This view of Kevin’s was echoed in a BRW article ‘Recruitment skills require work’ by Leo D’Angelo Fisher. What is becoming apparent to business now is that recruitment has been a rather haphazard and costly function, perhaps managed by the wrong people. Executives are starting to see that they have not paid enough attention measuring and managing the success of the recruitment function and the results are evident by how their businesses are performing. Some executives are seeing that recruitment has not been in hands of the right people with Leo D’Angelo Fisher saying “Managers and executives – the people running the businesses who understand them better than anyone else – should claw back from HR and recruitment firms the primary responsibility for recruiting key talent.”
The time and cost that businesses dedicate to hiring, training and retaining staff is one of the big ticket items on the balance sheet. In the current downturn businesses are starting to look at the numbers and seeing that things don’t seem to always add up.
What are your views? Where do you think recruitment should sit – with HR or the Hiring Manager?
7 Comments
I agree with Kevin, especially in a knowledge based industry where a high level of technical skills and abilities are required. However, I also believe Hiring Managers can learn a lot from HR in terms of conducting professional Interviews, completing assessments, establishing key criteria for positions, and assisting in the development of JD’s. Hiring Mgrs I work with involve HR in interviews to find out more about the person, not just their technical abilities. Quite often Line Managers aren’t interested in asking the kind of questions that will bring this out. Recruitment assists our line Managers by short listing candidates, arranging conference calls/interviews, contacting candidates, and being the liaison between the candidate and the hiring manager. It is a successful arrangement thus far and we are always working to improve.
To say recruitment should sit with either HR or Hiring Managers is a eliminating the opportunity for a joint effort. The best efforts are derived when there is a collaboration between the two.
I think a bit of both. HR need to be involved, perhaps at a later stage when the T&Cs of employment are negotiated.
However, HR should not be involved at teh early stages particularly for specialised posts. They usually do not have the skills and experience to screen candidates.
I have been invcolved in organisations where I have asked HR to recruit according to a particular and very specific IT skill set.
In the fullness of time,the job spec as drawn up by HR and the candidates presented to me had nothing in common with my requirements. A waste of time, money and effort by all parties.
They responded by saying that they had to abide by gender and demographic policies, and these were the best candidates according to those criteria.
I agree with Joanne that it must at the very least be a co-operative effort between HR and the Hiring manager. Each brings specific needs and skills to the table.
This is not an either/or question. The recruiting process and the knowledge of the hiring manager should go hand in hand. The hiring manager needs to be aware of competitors and talent that can strengthen his or her team. The recruiter needs to drive the process, represent the brand and assure – along with the hiring manager – that the very best person was hired for the position. In over 20 years, I have seen a lot of sloppy hiring done by recruiters and I can understand the desire to shift everything to the hiring manager but this is not the answer. Every time we go through layoffs, it is a good time to evaluate where your key performers came from at the time they were hired. I am sure that many recruiters like myself look and see that our placements are still employed with the companies we placed them in. Experts can be hiring managers and recruiters. The key is to invest and develop recruiting expertise throughout your organization. If your internal recruiters have 2 years experience, are juggling 60 requs and relying on postings to find candidates, it’s no big surprise that the results are haphazard and costly.
In my experience most HR people don’t regard recruitment as their favourite thing to do and as a result do not develop the skills necessary to do it effectively on a consistent basis.
A true recruiter loves the job OF RECRUITMENT ahead of anything else and as a result they have a deep skill set that enables them to source, recruit and hire top performers for their clients.
Line managers are generally not skilled at recruitment (although they clearly know what they want). When they work in partnership with a skilled recruiter (either external or internal) the best result is most likely to be achieved in the most time and cost effective way.
I think the above comments have hit the nail on the head. The problem with HR doing interviews is they don’t necessarily know the subject and that hiring managers don’t know how to interview.
HR makes mistakes like assuming something that is not mentioned on the cv is not done, whereas the candidate regards it as such a basic given that it’s too trivial to mention.
Hiring managers can ask about the specialist knowledge but don’t have the practise at ensuring the greater fit of a candidate to the business needs.
Hiring Managers definitely should have the responsibility of recruiting key, HR needs to ensure that the hiring managers have the skills and tools to do the job effectively. Having been both a HR and line manager, I made sure our line managers had the tools and skills necessary to make the final decision and then used my own knowledge for hiring frontline staff as a line manager.
Kelly,
Fantastic question! And some great discussion points from all above, interesting reading.
I have over the past 15 years seen much change in the recruitment industry, sadly most have not enhanced, evolved or grown the service delivery process for those who warrant it most, the candidate and the hiring manager. Some get it right, Goldman Sach’s are the best example, they are dedicated to their business objective and have HR as an enabler not a cost centre. It is challenging to find another and I have consulted to and worked for Global Top 10 recruiters and many of the top 100 businesses globally.
What most forget is that the hiring manager and candidate do not care how much commission a consultant earns or can the HR or in-house recruiter meets their time to fill KPI’s. this is a life changing decision which deserves respect.
Take recruitment from HR, much like learning and development – however do not set a recruitment function – and place the Consultant inside the business unit, as it is important that they feel part of the team, drive change with the business not for the business.
I could talk forever on this topic, but in short, all sides are doing their best, however maybe the marriage just isn’t working…..
Love to chat more if you are interested.
Chris
Sydney
One Trackback
[...] and should often be judged on a case by case basis. In a recent post on the Six Figures Blog “Who should own Recruitment – HR or Hiring Managers?” the consensus was mixed, which reinforces the need for a balanced approached to [...]