I think it is safe to say that communication in many aspects of our daily life is the difference-maker. For example, quality communication can help a marriage blossom into a lifetime of love and growth. While poor communication can suck the love out of a marriage.
At some point, it’s natural to get into the semantics of what constitutes “quality communication”. It might be easier to describe what poor communication looks like. Either way, it requires a conversation.
Strong communication is an essential element in talent management, especially during recruitment and selection. The semantics matter and taking the time to ensure all parties involved have a clear understanding saves time, money, resources, and relationships.
With this in mind it is surprising that organizations hire Managed Service Providers to operate their talent management systems when part of what they do is limit communication. They manage the process by many times restricting vendors’ contact with hiring managers and require vendors to blindly submit to a job posting. The adjective”blindly” is leveraged because how much can you really get out of the 10-page job description with five of the pages of “nice to have.” Even the individual who created the job description knows the odds of finding someone who possesses all of the skills, knowledge, and abilities listed is a long shot at best. Furthermore, the majority of job descriptions are out of date and poorly crafted.
A charecteristic of quality communication is context. Some job opportunties are big changes for individuals and big moves for organizations require time. Yet its common practice for Managed Service Providers to manage speed. They hold vendors accountable to submit a candidate to at least 90% of job postings, following the rate card, and within 72 hours. It focuses on speed and cost, two components that while are relative are not the most important criteria a talent vendor should be evaluated on.
To recap, Managed Service Providers, limit the communication talent suppliers can have with hiring managers and hold them accountable to turn around talent quickly and at a discount. Talent suppliers have no opportunity to learn about the team, its subcultures, the strategy, the exciting projects they will be working on, or the cool opportunities to grow their skill set. So when the prospective talent asks questions, the recruiters either lie, embellish or don’t answer them because they never had the opportunity to communicate with the hiring manager. If an organization truly wants to hire top talent, this is precisely what they should avoid doing. Why would any skilled individual want to waste their time with a recruiting firm or organization that is shooting in the dark?
If an organization indeed views talent as the difference-maker, they would alter their partnership with a managed service firm or avoid hiring one. Instead, build a quality talent management strategy and structure internally. Then interview and select a few talent suppliers to partner with the internal team. For example, say an organization budgets $10m on contingent workers (an employee that is not full-time) and $10M for full-time workers. The organization reviews its internal resources and identify they do not have the bandwidth to conduct the recruitment and selection by themselves. They can identify 5-6 talent suppliers, interview them, and select three to partner with for the year. Set parameters around expectations, communication channels, and a performance appraisal to measure them by.
This type of arrangement benefits all parties involved. From a talent supplier standpoint, they are guaranteed an opportunity at $10M in revenue and, at worst, should be able to get $1M in revenue. That is an excellent year for any recruiter or account manager. The organization just became three Account Managers most valuable account. The account managers will give extra attention, effort, and truly get an opportunity to learn what type of talent works best within the organization’s culture. If the suppliers perform and the talent needs remain the same for the following year, then you sign another agreement with the suppliers. If a supplier does not deliver, choose another supplier to take their place the following year.
From an organizational standpoint, you have true partners. The talent suppliers will invest in getting to know the organization and delivering quality resources. Meaning the talent supplier will allocate (or at least should in theory) their top recruiters to the job requirements from their firm. Also, they become a fantastic marketing tool for the organization. On average, recruiters will talk to between 20-45 prospects a week. When they speak with the prospects, they can be honest with them about the relationship with the organization, answer any questions the prospects may have, and provide honest and quality feedback to the organization about their reputation in the marketplace.
There are, of course, other benefits for both the organizations and the talent suppliers, but I think you get the point. It’s a pure win, win, win scenario. The final win is for the talent prospects. Recruiters can do a better job finding quality talent and courting them. Organizations can spend quality time interviewing top talent.
At the end of the day, talent is never on sale. It takes time to recruit and select individuals that have the knowledge, abilities, and skills to perform the job. In addition, identifying if they are a fit for the organization’s structure and environment. Managed Service Providers limit an organization’s talent potential. They waste organizations’ time by confusing busy with productivity, and pocket the “financial savings” by bleeding talent suppliers, and more importantly, the prospects of fair pay. On paper Managed Service Providers may save organizations money, however organizations end up paying for it later by having to rebuild their reputation in the marketplace. A-players talk to A-players, and it doesn’t take long for the message to travel.
Dont outsource and short-change your talent strategy. The talent takes the abstract ideas and makes them a reality. Regardless of the mission and strategy, talent is required to execute it. Don’t be fooled by the illusion of talent outsourcement. Give your future talent the time and resources required.
