Some number of years ago when I first “fell” into the staffing world it looked as if the job was a simple task of matching orders to available talent. There were few if any contracts, terms were discussed and implemented and the contract employee was put to work. Simple enough in theory and practical in application. Work was done for reasons like, maternity leaves, vacation, peak work loads and projects that were facing deadlines. Throw in that there were projects that entailed work for extended periods of time but not a person on staff once the work was completed and we had reasons for doing business.
As the staffing industry has progressed, so have the rules of engagement. Contracts were created by both the staffing firms and their clients. The process has become much more a formal start to finish and that is just on the simple vendor to client relationship. Throw in the VMS (Vendor Managed Services) and now we start to add layers and cost to the process. Without going overboard, we now can include third party arrangements, off-shore and near-shore options and the menu has become one that can be confusing for companies that are considering/ utilizing staffing as an option.
With all this in mind, I offer one simple thought. Companies have needs that entail the use of contract labor. At the end of the day it is about finding the best possible candidate at an appropriate price. Layering the process can dilute the end result and leave all parties less than satisfied. Respect the need for what it is and utilize the solution that fits the need. If we look at this process much like we approach shopping for a new sport shoe I believe that there is a parallel to be found. Certainly there are different shoes for different sports and I can’t take away from that basic premise but can say that the majority of us can use one shoe for multiple situations. If I were to go and but a pair of shoes for a spin class but have another pair for weight training and then a pair to jog in but certainly then require another pair to walk to the car and to drive home in and …………….we would need a bigger bag and a fair amount of money. So has become the idea of staffing as a solution.
At the end of the day staffing is all about the right candidate at the right price. If approached in the proper fashion it can be a beneficial process that doesn’t require a heavy amount of structure. Keeping perspective is a wonderful thing and staffing can still be a positive solution.
June 1, 2007 at 7:11 pm
As with many things, human nature is to over-engineer. Human nature is to always feel that something can be improved upon…a process can be made more efficient…a product can be made more valuable…which is a good trait to have. But a better trait is to know when to stop “improving”. To know when to step back and say “This works really well,” and let it go.
The Apples and Googles of the world understand this, other companies do not. I would argue that in an attempt to make contingent staffing simpler and more effective, many companies have done just the opposite…made it more convoluted and complex. The process of procuring contingent labor has been over-engineered to an extreme.
June 1, 2007 at 7:47 pm
I responded to this in my own blog.
http://lisaamorao.com/blog
June 4, 2007 at 10:57 pm
Interestingly enough staffing firms have in an attempt to distinguish themselves created solutions to any number of topics. Change is good when kept in perspective. Years ago it was not uncommon for sales people to “distinguish” themselves by telling perspective clients that they performed reference checks. Then it became background investigations and so on and so on…………..All to often the process that is entailed in placing a candidate has become so involved that it can be restrictive in getting the right person in a timely and cost effective fashion. The industry should as you suggest, look at what is best as a solution and build performance based reputations versus unsustainable promises.
While the staffing industry is caught in this race to build bigger solutions, perhaps we should look at what one of my larger clients views as significant concern is the predicted shortage of degreed candidates to fill technical jobs in the future. No longer is the client concerned about the cost. Opening off-shore locations and providing U.S. based management to direct efforts will be costly but applicable. What does this do to the staffing industry model? What solutions can be provided to ensure longevity? Will the industry shift from a large population of companies to a smaller number that are international in nature and can financially afford to play in this space? Time will tell what path the staffing industry takes but it certainly is one that runs the risk of building solutions that don’t always offer the right person at an appropriate price.
June 5, 2007 at 12:10 am
You should write a separate post about that response comment.
)
June 13, 2007 at 11:31 pm
I had more thoughts on this in my blog.
http://lisaamorao.com/blog
July 4, 2007 at 12:56 am
do you get mhz when you buy ddr2 ram