Quality of Hire...what else matters?

re: Quality of Hire...what else matters?

Jason Davis — Thu, 28 Apr 2005 23:33:29 GMT

Thanks Heather

re: Quality of Hire...what else matters?

HeatherLeigh — Thu, 28 Apr 2005 23:01:42 GMT

Jason- was referring to corporate recruiters ("internal recruiters" means something a little different to us), but a lot of it goes for third party as well. If your client isn't happy, they don't come back, but I suspect that cost per hire and time to fill have a little different application in the third party space and repeeat business must surely be a good measure of quality (at least with companies that have long term staffing needs, versus one-off).

re: Quality of Hire...what else matters?

Jason Davis — Thu, 28 Apr 2005 15:05:07 GMT

Are you talking about third party recruiters or internal recruiters?

Jason

re: Quality of Hire...what else matters?

Andrew Marritt — Thu, 28 Apr 2005 08:01:44 GMT

Heather,

I had missed your comments on the earlier posts (a weakness of using RSS readers to read posts?) - thanks for drawing my attention to them.

Over the weekend I wrote a longish article on measuring Quality of Hire & deduced pretty much the same thing that you have - that quality is the goal we should be aiming at, but it is something that can only be measured in a small number of instances. You can find that post here: http://resourcingstrategies.blogspot.com/2005/04/metrics-just-because-something-is.html

In that I conclude that the thing that most matters is the perception of your hiring managers. From a holistic point of view I would add that measuring all stakeholders' views of the recruitment process is important & if you are really committed there is worth from measuring the perceptions of some of those you don't hire (see http://resourcingstrategies.blogspot.com/2004/12/linking-corporate-and-employment-brand.html for a summary of the effect on corporate brand perception of recruitment activities).

I'm not against the 'traditional measures' (time & cost to hire) but believe that they should be used where they are relevant - to help the recruiter understand and prioritise their tactical decisions.

Andrew

re: Quality of Hire...what else matters?

HeatherLeigh — Thu, 28 Apr 2005 04:34:51 GMT

Hi Rami...good question. Many companies have some kind of performance evaluation methodology that works with their review model. So usually the information needed to do this analysis already exists with the purpose of identifying who to reward, etc.

For companies that don't have such a structured process, I think that the recruiter needs to ask the hiring manager directly.

re: Quality of Hire...what else matters?

Rami A. — Thu, 28 Apr 2005 03:54:20 GMT

Hi Heather,
The links you posted talked about quality of hire by talking about performance and retention metrics. The retention I may be able to figure out how it's measure. But performance, I'm having a hard time figuring out a way especially for non-sales, non-coding type positions like marketing. How do you know that you hired the right person?