As originally published on ERE.net…

A time right about now,
In a galaxy not far, far away,
A world exists where recruiting labor swirls
Within corporate hiring needs,
Melding with sourcing and branding,
Colliding with hiring process and adoption,
A war has erupted in the expanse of options in how to best recruit to fill corporate talent voids: Outsource vs. In Source; RPO vs. RPWhat; RPWho vs. RPHuh?

I am not a Star Wars geek but a fan of the movie series (as a child of the 80’s). When I sat down to write about Recruitment Process Outsourcing (RPO) services and the necessity of developing a comprehensive Request for Proposal (RFP) process when selecting a supplier, I realized the story was much bigger. The title popped in my head as I looked at the evolution of RPO. But as I continued to write I realized that RPO is a world into itself fighting for relevance as it continues to be defined.

I opted to tell the story from a Corporate Staffing Leader’s perspective, taking it from the initial decision point of whether or not to outsource recruiting labor. I could think of no better characters to choose than C3PO and R2D2 to use as metaphor. For those not familiar with the Star Wars movie series, C3PO and R2D2 are droids and sub characters who play pivotal parts in the stories.

Relevant to this article, they each stand alone in parts of the story but are more effective when they are together. They form a team often helping the heroes escape danger or provide insights into the action. Now for the transition, provide me some latitude to support the title, like C3PO and R2D2, an RPO Service Provider can be selected without running through an RFP process. But it is best practice to not do one without the other. The proposal and subsequent information gathered from the RFP process allow an organization to better outline their requirements in evaluating and comparing RPO providers. The results will offer a clearer picture in selecting the right RPO provider while setting performance expectations.

As a corporate staffing leader, I was an early adopter of the RPO model and preferred to outsource recruiting labor versus building a large internal team. The strategy was to shift employment burden to an external partner and control recruiting labor costs as a cost of doing business versus head count. As well as be able to flex resources to meet cyclical demands. I maintained an internal recruiting team to handle critical roles and outsourced all others. The results were successful and like any recruiting team, it was necessary to manage performance closely. I did not have droids to calculate and formulate a strategy, it was a bit like piloting an X-Wing Fighter by feel, but it started with a plan.

Mistakes in Selecting RPO
Over the years, I have fielded inquiries from colleagues regarding RPO services and lagging performance. I found a common theme in that some organizations select and implement RPO services without conducting proper due diligence to outline business requirements, understand cultural acceptance, establish objectives and pilot prior to full-scale implementation. The word “Recruiting” is a broad term often associated with staffing agencies and I learned that most of these colleagues selected their RPO provider similarly in how they select staffing agencies, with little due diligence. I strongly caution against this approach. The services are vastly different. Selecting an RPO provider is a decision that will impact the business (and often HR’s reputation) and it is important to put forth the same effort in selecting an RPO as an organization puts forth in selecting an Applicant Tracking System (ATS). Arguably, the performance of an RPO can have more influence on business leader perception of HR than an ATS.

Importance of Project Management
Proper due diligence requires identifying a project leader, unlike Palpatine (the authoritarian) and more like Obi Wan (the collaborator), to formulate a project plan to help you methodically work through the project phases. If you have a Project Management Organization (PMO), I suggest you partner with them to help drive the project. If not, I suggest someone be assigned to take on the Project Management duties to help drive the project to completion. In support of the Project Leader, I recommend you build a cross functional project team that will include a handful of HR colleagues and business users of the RPO services. I have learned in my career that change management starts early in the process and the sooner you engage business managers, the better the result during implementation. The project team will be the primary resource to answer questions and validate requirements. The scope of your initiative will predicate the amount of time it will take to develop and execute against a project plan. But use the “Force” of project management to guide you.

In its basic form, the project plan should have four phases:
• Discovery
• Development
• Implementation
• On Going ROI

For this article as Episode I, we will focus exclusively on parts of the Discovery Phase as it has the most depth and variables depending on your objectives. Not to send you into the deepest reaches of project management space, I will not belabor all the steps associated with conducting proper Discovery as it can be done quickly depending on the scope and resources available to you. But I do intend to hit the basic steps to assure a baseline is established.

The Discovery Phase has four primary stages:
• Requirements
• Evaluation
• Selection
• Negotiation

Building the Business Case for Why
Under the Requirements stage, it is essential to build a business case to garner support from the business for RPO, like a representative in front of the Galactic Senate, which starts with a hypothesis to explain “why” this should be considered. Examples might include:
• Metrics show that 80% of recruiting resources are allocated to low-strategic value hiring initiatives.
• A business unit might be located in a unique area where recruiting resources are not situated, and not deemed strategic enough to allocate internal recruiting resources.
• The organization does not have an internal recruiting function but would like to establish dedicated recruiting resources for the business.
Once the “why” is established, next steps would be to expand upon the findings to articulate “what” the RPO will solve or improve.

Defining “What” RPO will Solve
To get to the “what” will entail a bit more research. A few examples might be:
• Review of all hiring workflows and recruiting labor load analysis categorized by type of hiring (e.g. executive, professional, non-exempt) by region and/or business unit.
• More simply, hiring demand divided by resources for proper allocation (e.g. X requisitions per recruiter).
In the least, the research should show an opportunity to improve hiring with additional or redeployment of resources such as efficiencies in time to fill or volume of hires within a period of time. To support the “what”, it is important to know the cost of current operations which will establish budget perimeters. Cost reduction is always attractive to add to the business case but RPO is not about cost reduction rather investment. Unless the RPO is replacing heavy staffing agency or exec search usage and their fees, an RPO will not be lower cost of an internal recruiting function. Rather it is a deferral of cost and an investment to improve hiring to allow the organization to be more competitive. I recommend the improvements be more about quality and speed of hire versus cost.

Now that the business case is developed and project management team is set, we will follow C3RPO & RFP2D2 out of the Requirements sector deeper into the Evaluation stage into the world of “Demo-gobah.” A wild place where plans go awry, surprises occur, and relationships are made or ruined during the review of RFPs and demonstration of services. How do you develop an RFP? How do you select a final supplier? How do you negotiate pricing? What metrics should be measured? In my best Yoda voice: seek these answers you will in the next article of RPO Wars: Episode II – A New Decision.

As originally published on hr.com…

I loosely borrow Ray Bradbury´s famous science fiction novel title, Fahrenheit 451, the degree at which paper burns, to make a point: technology can eliminate the use of paper in hiring practices – if you are not working toward a paperless process, you should be.

When we focus on how technology has influenced human resources functions, it is hard to find a better example than the transformation of the hiring processes in best-of-breed organizations. Technology has impacted or influenced every aspect of this function, from electronic resumes to electronic offers; the process can be executed entirely without paper.

The foundation for paperless hiring operations is database management software. This ´newer´ breed of software application is currently referred to as an applicant tracking system (ATS). However, I would argue that not every person in an ATS database is an applicant; candidate yes, but applicant no. Candidate Management System (CMS) is a more accurate term. I digress.

When looking to automate hiring practices this technology becomes the driver of automation. It enables most tasks to be administered, documented and communicated electronically in a searchable centralized database. And it goes far beyond just capturing resumes. From return-on-investment (ROI) to affirmative action plan (AAP) compliance, essentially all critical data can be captured, tracked and reported. But it must start with a plan.

Technology implementation has four distinct phases. Each should be defined for your organization before contacting the first technology vendor. The four phases are: Planning, Selection, Implementation and Maintenance. You will soon realize that technology integration is only part of the big picture when reviewing process automation. And there has been much written about technology vendor selection and the necessary precautions to take with this fledgling group of companies. However, what is more critical than vendor selection is the planning phase of a technology implementation project.

The planning phase is essentially the blueprint for your new hiring infrastructure, which will outline technology´s involvement. If it is not detailed and defined, the project and program will get lost and drift aimlessly. So it is important to adhere to the fundamentals of developing a project plan. It consists of 4 disciplines: Audit, Draft, Vision, and Requirements.

When preparing to review and enhance existing programs, do not move forward lightly. To borrow a statement from fellow consultant and friend Jeremy Eskenazi, “Be prepared to blow up your existing processes.” You will take the roles of demolition artist, architect and builder. This is also a very good time to reacquaint yourself with the business…if you do not know or have questions about your company´s services or products; this is the time to ask lots of questions. You should have a thorough understanding of who you´re hiring program is helping and why.

PLANNING PHASE

The Audit: It is necessary to begin the planning phase with an audit. Understand your existing processes before building new processes. Essentially you need to know where you´ve been before you know where you´re going. The Audit consists of two focuses: Workflow Mapping and Role Profiling (task allocation, time/attendance and benchmarks). This will give a clear picture of your current infrastructure and team participation. Follow in the sequential order:

Workflow Mapping:

• A step-by-step birds-eye view flow chart of tasks and decision points per role and how they interconnect to completion.

Role Profiling:

• Task allocation: an itemized list of tasks per person or role
• Time/attendance: captures % of time per task that calculates a role´s daily or weekly workload to attendance.
• Benchmarks: capture best performance (or average performance) per task or group of tasks that quantifies the performance of workload per role.

These focuses should include every role involved in the process; hiring managers, coordinators, candidates, and not just recruiters and HR business partners. Once the audit is complete, you´re ready to begin constructing your preliminary draft of your new program.

The Draft: Once the audit is complete, develop a preliminary draft to be used as a working model of the new infrastructure. It will be your 2-dimensional view to integrate with the technology. The Draft has four focuses: Deconstruction, Workflow Mapping, Role Profiling and Validation. Follow in this sequential order:

Deconstruction:

• Analysis of the old process and looking for areas to automate. For instance, if a recruiter was literally putting non-qualified resumes in a folder in a filing cabinet, this step will be eliminated with the candidate resume being kept in the database.

Workflow Mapping:

• Develop a new step by step birds-eye view flow chart of tasks and/or decision points per role and how they interconnect to completion. But you will also add technology usage per role.

Role Profiling:

• Task allocation: an itemized list of tasks per person or role. During the draft phase it is only necessary to initiate this part of the role profile

Validation:

• Comparative analysis between the old program versus the new program to identify automation efficiencies and estimated cost savings. Essentially your “proof-of-concept.”

Similar to the audit, build out the draft focuses for each person involved in the process. Once the preliminary draft is complete, you are prepared for the next step, the Vision.

The Vision: once the draft phase is complete, it is now time to gain approval and assemble an influential steering team that will help finalize the preliminary draft. The Vision has four focuses: Approval, Identification, Presentation, and Findings. Follow in this sequential order:

Approval:

• Develop an executive summary to present to the most senior level stakeholder in the project. Preferably an officer or corporate executive leader. This is necessary to gain project credibility and funding. Without completing this step, the project will be set up for failure.

Identification:

• Assess and identify a representative group of program participants, such as executive or senior level managers and “power” users. It is critical to keep a manageable group size, but a group that can be called upon to support the project at any point during implementation.

Presentation:

• Conduct an introduction meeting with the steering team to outline project objectives, timing and preliminary draft. It is necessary to discuss the draft infrastructure and get feedback to finalize overall process and technology requirements.

Findings:

• Add, modify and/or edit the preliminary draft based upon feedback from the presentation session to finalize the pilot project plan.

The Requirements: now that you´ve audited, validated and coordinated the project and gained the necessary approval and support, you´re ready to lay out the overall requirements for technology application. The Requirements has four focuses: Process, User, Unique Qualifiers, and Budget. Follow in this sequential order:

Process:

• Articulate the technology interaction within the process to clarify the necessary application per task. Outline must haves versus preferences such as email integration versus Internet accessibility.

User:

• Articulate the technology and user interface to clarify the necessary capabilities for ease-of-use and features. Outline must haves versus preferences such as drag-and-drop usability versus filling out fields to document activity.

Unique Qualifiers:

• Articulate any unique needs for process or users, such as foreign languages and/or data reporting.

Budget:

• Formulate a budget range that will maintain a positive cost/benefit result and will not allow over-purchasing of unnecessary features. Essentially keep with the basics and set your budget accordingly.

Once you´ve pulled your requirements into a report, congratulations! You have successfully completed the Planning Phase. You are now ready to move into the Vendor Selection phase. The Requirements report will be the foundation for the Request for Information (RFI) or Request for Proposal (RFP) stages in identifying potential vendors. But more importantly you are on your way to becoming paperless.

This methodology is not theory, but rather a validated practice I have used while in my corporate roles and with my clients as a consultant. It is a practical approach to organizing and preparing for technology implementation. Each remaining phase of technology implementation (Selection, Implementation and Maintenance) should similarly be articulated and organized.

Lastly, the most important role you play as a project leader is ´champion´. If you do not carry the torch and remain passionate throughout the entire process, no one else will and the project will fail. Whether you are a novice or seasoned project leader, it is important to assemble the necessary resources to enable you to succeed.

Develop relationships with peers and consultants, and stay connected with offline or online publications to help you keep abreast of best practices. This approach will help ensure your success and reputation as a contributor to the organization. Good Luck!

As originally published on ere.net…

Creep is defined in the dictionary as “to move stealthily and cautiously”. This description accurately portrays that of a hiring manager’s movements when gaining approval to open a job requisition during a hiring freeze. I am not sure if camouflage and face paint are required to slip their job requisition through the process, but the image suffices to illustrate the cunning necessary to get it done.

Hiring freeze is a subjective phrase which does not hold the same definition as the game freeze tag played on most playgrounds. Managers are not good at holding still for very long and often work in slow deliberate movements emblematic of practicing Tai Chi on the front lawn in the morning. It is easy to see them standing there but unless you stick around and watch their collective movements you’ll miss the outcome of their efforts.

As HR professionals managing in a very challenging economic environment, it would seem that the definition of “freeze” would have stronger interpretation now than in cycles of the recent past. But similar to patterns of behavior in prior hiring freezes, we see the inevitable Requisition Creep. I have uncovered 3 theories (no research conducted) to help describe this phenomenon and layout some ideas on how HR can best respond to this event as well as prepare for the eventual economic recovery.

In my coffee house discussions and conference conferring I have found common ground among HR professionals in my discovery of requisition creep. It truly exists. And in my reams of undocumented data, a few trends have emerged. It becomes a study of human behavior that would make Jung proud.

The first of these theories is caused by a common human defense mechanism when faced with adversity: Denial.  Like a change management project, poor financial results often take time to be absorbed and interpreted by an entire organization.  But there are always those managers who choose to only hear what they want to hear and disregard any other information as unimportant or incorrect. You know the same person who closes their door and ignores the alarm during a fire drill.

I’ve worked with these types of managers and it’s as if they do not allow themselves to believe in what’s happening in the world around them. An example of this would be a time I reminded a manager attempting to get his requisition opened that all requisition approvals were under heavy scrutiny. He retorted that his project was not affected by the cost containment measures because it was too important to the business. Unfortunately he did not get his requisition approved but attempted to manipulate our recruiting team to begin sourcing for the position regardless of the status of the opening. He felt if he found a qualified applicant he would be able to garner support for approval of the offer and the requisition. The recruiting team did not support his efforts and he later was disciplined for working with an outside agency on the opening. I read a similar story about a CIO who wielded his authority to support a project during a down cycle in his business and pushed through several hires to support the project. He essentially placed a bet on his career and was subsequently terminated when the project was unable to show an immediate return once implemented. I am not sure these managers wear rose colored glasses but they definitely wear a heavy set of blinders.

The second of these theories is caused by either a blow to the head or some other mind altering event that creates disconnect from reality: Blissfully Ignorant. It is the opposite of chicken-little, a perpetual high of positivity that prevents any negative or constructive information to come through. Inherently not a bad management trait but if left unmanaged will limit the logic or rationale of the manager. This also can be seen in the manager who can’t say ‘no’ or who can’t terminate poor performing employees. They believe that it will always get better.

These managers have similar characteristics to those in Denial but have one clear distinction: they can’t stop themselves. A good example of this is when I was working with a Director who could not help himself from approving requisitions for his team. We had just sat together in the same management meeting where a hiring freeze was announced and direction was given to put everything on hold and no new requisitions could be opened until further notice. Not a day later a requisition with his signature came across my desk and when I questioned him he remarked that he had no choice. If he did not approve the requisitions for his team, they would leave. He was a solid manager with a strong team but he lacked leadership skills. He improved later with coaching and development but is a good example of the manager who would rather ignore than face reality.

The third of these theories is caused by group thought and the gravitational forces of attraction: Herd Mentality. I do not intend to compare managers with Water Buffalo but I dare to compare them to Wal Mart shoppers the day after Thanksgiving. Managers operating under Denial or Ignorance often stand alone when attempting to push their openings through. The Herders do not act alone and wait for an invisible trigger to push their openings through. Typically the trigger is rumor that a manager in denial or ignorance attempted to get their requisition approved. I think they must figure en masse some of them will be denied but that many will get through. Which is an interesting strategy during a hiring freeze where most job requisitions require executive level approval, bombarding the executives might work.   I must admit it never worked in the organizations I worked however it was an interesting trend of events to observe.

Inevitably business conditions improve and/or attrition causes the approval of requisitions in the organization. Because hiring freezes are often the precursor to layoffs and HR is often viewed as a cost center, the function is typically impacted with recruiting being an easy target. And HR is often left flat footed to respond to the recruiting needs when they arrive. Strategic HR leaders have a few options in their cache to answer the call of business.

The obvious solution is to hire recruiting support. But recruiting support has evolved from the agency dominated period of the 80’s, through the fledgling internet onslaught of the 90’s, into the post-modern (err recessionary) period of Y2K. An HR Director can literally select from a menu of organizations and services to help with recruiting and they can order the combination plate or a la carte. However, with the evolution of recruiting support, the advancement of technology, the proliferation of talent acquisition tools and techniques, one thing remains constant to drive effective talent acquisition programs: human labor. Nothing can replace experienced recruiters. It’s like attempting to build a business without sales or marketing professionals.

To strip it to the core, an HR Director has 3 options to study when developing a recruiting strategy that requires recruiting labor to drive the process: full time, contract, or outsource.  Each solution has its advantages and disadvantages however each will suffice to drive the process predicated upon the budget, culture, expectations, and demands of the business.

Hiring a full time recruiter is a well known approach. The benefits of full time recruiters are they are you…a part of the culture, they drink the Kool-Aid, and the business intelligence gained stays with you. The challenge of hiring a full time recruiter during a down business cycle is the irony that a job opening might not be approved. It is important to note that the salary and burden, including facilities, systems, and advertising spend (e.g. job boards, databases, etc) attributes to the detriment of this solution.

Hiring a contract recruiter is another well known approach and offers similar benefits to that of a full time hire but offers greater flexibility in cost. Notice it is not a burden rather the hourly rate paid is deemed a cost of doing business and typically an easier sell to management during down business cycles. However, although the labor cost is flexible, the requirement of facilities, systems, and advertising spend can be viewed as a detriment.

Hiring an outsourced recruiter is a novel approach that offers a blend of the benefits of contract and full time without the high cost. Not to be confused with retained executive firms or agency recruiters who provide a limited slate of candidates for a fee calculated by percentage of annual salary, outsourced recruiting provides recruiting labor to drive the process in partnership with HR and the manager. And it can be broken down into parts such as just sourcing support or full life cycle. All business intelligence gleaned from the search is reported and systems, facilities, advertising costs are all part of the fee. The detriment to outsourced recruiting is that it is a low touch approach in that most outsourced recruiters are located virtually.

I ask you, what kind of manager are you…in denial, blissfully ignorant, or a herder? Of course this was a satirical look at workplace behavior during a down economic cycle but the good news is that all cycles rotate and business growth will return. Whether or not you agree the phenomenon of Req Creep is real, down times are often good times to experiment and pilot new services. Those that innovate and prepare for the inevitable positive rotation will find themselves ahead in the race for talent.  The war for talent ended with layoffs, it will inevitably turn into a race for talent in the next upswing…another observation worth exploring over coffee!

As originally published on ere.net…

Spring has arrived and much like our economic recovery, it is working to get a foot hold on the slippery chill of winter. Like the seasons, business cycles are perpetual and growth and employment will return. Like the affects of a harsh winter, the landscape can forever be changed and it can be argued that the economic downturn has forever changed corporate recruiting. In many corporations, recruiting is seen as a cost center and many functions were downsized in cost cutting measures. As economists analyze signs of economic recovery, hiring activity has picked up in comparison to a year ago. And many of these recruiting functions that were impacted by layoffs are now being challenged to keep up with hiring demand with fewer resources.

To augment the labor load balance of supply and demand, talent acquisition leaders restricted by head count and budget limitations are partnering with external suppliers. Recruitment Process Outsourcing or RPO service providers are seen as a logical choice to partner for recruiting labor support. However, RPO service standards do not exist and vary between organizations.  Talent acquisition leaders are left to decipher between service offerings to identify the right partners to align. With the term RPO being utilized loosely by many suppliers, the marketplace can be confusing.

To contribute to the confusion, many of the true RPO providers have evolved from pure outsourced providers to offering specific task oriented services to support the individual steps of the recruiting process. I describe the move from broad scope to narrow scope as the emergence of micro recruiting services. In an attempt to understand the change, I will explore the relationship between RPO providers and their customers and the catalyst for transformation.

The RPO industry is evolving driven by client demand. The need for full scale outsourcing has shifted as hiring activity waned last year. By definition, the PO in RPO means process outsourcing or to shift the burden of day to day management of a process to an external supplier.  The idea is that the process, albeit important, is not part of the core business offering and can be better managed by a specialized vendor.  An example would be the outsourcing of call center recruitment or a short term recruiting project to ramp up a new business unit. The value being that internal recruiting resources would remain focused on critical employment and not be distracted by spikes in demand or less strategic initiatives.

As many companies hunkered down in 2008 and 2009 and implemented cost cutting measures, hiring slowed and corporate recruiting functions were fighting for relevance as the downturn continued. The broader RPO services were not needed and RPO suppliers found themselves in the dubious position of being perceived as a threat by corporate recruiting functions.  The term ‘outsource’ became a cause for concern for many talent acquisition leaders as layoffs cut deeper into organizations. RPO businesses needed to reinvent. In performance review meetings and sales calls, RPO representatives changed their language from touting the value of outsourcing to supplemental or support services. They positioned themselves as an ally and not a threat to internal corporate recruiting functions. They listened to their customers challenged by req creep.

Many talent acquisition leaders evaluated their current operations and looked for ways to become more efficient in handling the demand. The obvious challenge was to figure out how to balance the load. They found that most full cycle recruiters working on 20 or more professional openings lose their sourcing effectiveness and become project and relation managers. The more innovative functions divided the labor into sourcing, administration, and recruiting but found limitations to scale as the req load increased. Contract Recruiters are a viable option however training and workspace issues burden ramp up time and the cost of additional ads and sourcing tools burden tight budgets.  Creative RPO providers jumped at the opportunity to close the gap on recruiting labor shortages. They unbundled their broad offerings and developed individual services such as Full Cycle, Co-Sourcing, Response Management, and Pipelining to better meet their customer requirements.

In deconstructing the recruiting process, talent acquisition leaders evaluated the effectiveness of hybrid models, utilizing a blend of supplier provided services with internal recruiting resources. They found they could expand their recruiting teams with Full Cycle services without expanding headcount. Internal recruiters at load capacity would benefit from Co-Sourcing assistance which allowed external recruiters to work with the internal recruiters to populate their pipeline of talent with qualified candidates while internal recruiters maintained ownership of relations with the hiring manager. Sourcing and administration teams burdened by the candidate rich market and the overwhelming response from their efforts, welcomed the extra support from external recruiters offering Response Management in helping to qualify resumes and phone screen qualified candidates. And for those functions with candidate relationship management strategies put on hold, Pipelining support allowed them to reinitiate strategic talent efforts to help position their organization for growth and finding key talent.

Talent acquisition leaders are attracted to three key value propositions of these micro recruiting services: cost, scale, and intelligence. At this stage in the economic recovery, companies are varied in their levels of investment in recruiting. For example, technology companies are investing heavily in recruiting as product development and marketing initiatives increase demand for talent where as healthcare companies are cautious as they interpret the impact of reform but still look to position themselves for growth.  In both cases, companies are investing at some level and hiring more recruiters is not always the answer. Talent acquisition leaders are looking for ways to maximize their investment.

In regards to cost, micro recruiting services are significantly less than broader project based or standard search fees. Micro recruiting service fees are anywhere from $1000 – $5000 based upon project or monthly cost and include advertising, phone, and computer related burden. Versus hourly rate or percentage of annual salary, the cost is typically contained and predictable allowing for accurate forecasting in measuring against cost-per-hire benchmarks. In regards to scale, as compared to hiring recruiters or engaging contract recruiters, micro recruiting services can be engaged within 24 hours, if not sooner. It is a true plug and play resource with recruiters on call. Obviously size of project and volume of recruiting labor needed affects the time to engage but in the spirit of the service, it is on demand. It can be disengaged just as rapidly when it is no longer needed. In regards to intelligence, the information gleaned from sourcing is not lost. Companies are paying for recruiting labor and the recruiting labor is an extension of the existing corporate recruiting team. Candidates sourced and qualified belong to the corporation and that data or intelligence is shared and input into the client’s ATS.  And in some cases, a seamless relationship is developed where the external recruiters work directly in the client’s ATS. Applicant and diversity tracking requirements remain intact.

This is an exciting time for corporate recruiting functions as they continue to evolve and define their value within organizations during the economic recovery. The ultimate goal remains the same: to find top talent as quickly as possible. But how they execute against that goal is rapidly changing with the advent of suppliers offering new services to augment and support their initiatives. The challenge for talent acquisition leaders will be to identify, pilot, and find the right supplier with the right services.  And as RPO organizations continue to partner closely with their customers, new services will be developed and the industry will continue to advance. Ultimately it takes a cataclysmic event such as the Great Recession to enforce change and the adoption of new ideas. We find ourselves in some stage of evolution of recruiting services and some experts are predicting full scale outsourcing but ultimately change is driven by demand and today less is more, flat is up, and micro is in.