State of Talent Acquisition 2016

Transcription

1 State of Talent Acquisition 2016 Presented by ERE Media A Tale of Two Views

2 State of Talent Acquisition 2016 A Tale of Two Views The Survey by the Numbers Participants Too many jobs to backfill, a lack of workforce planning and forecasting and little support from business leaders are among the leading reasons why talent acquisition leaders say they and their teams aren t more effective at meeting the talent objectives of the business. What leaders worry about the most are issues common to most businesses: the quality of the candidates and the slow pace of hiring, which costs the company good candidates. They also worry about the inconsistencies and challenges in the hiring process, and the technology they re using. Our 2016 State of Talent Acquisition survey tells us these are the issues that most concern TA leaders. They re what keep them up at night. And they haven t changed much in the three years we ve conducted our annual survey. This year s survey showed us that after three years, not much has changed in talent acquisition. In a moment, we ll explain what has and it s a troubling development. First, some of the findings from the 2016 survey surveys from inhouse recruiters, leaders, and hiring managers. 383 from agency, RPO, staffing, etc. 635 companies from 7 industry sectors. o 174 from Tech/Telecom, the largest group 70 companies >100,000 workers 103 companies <100 workers Roles 29% - Head of talent acquisition 28% - TA or sourcing manager or lead 26% - Recruiter or sourcer 9% - HR generalist 7% - Recruiting support / other Experience 41% - 10 or more years 21% - Less than 2 years 1

3 Time to Fill As every recruiter knows, the time it takes to fill a position varies widely by the role, the industry and other factors. Our survey shows the average is somewhere near 60 days. When we looked at just those companies that track time to fill and included only those who actually know, we found that 3-in-10 companies take more than 60 days to fill a job; 9% take at least 3 months! It s tempting to think that with more recruiters you can fill reqs faster. There is some truth to that. Just under 75% of companies with 50 or more recruiters fill their jobs in less than 60 days. The rest take longer, though only 3% take as long as 90 days or more. For companies with recruiters, the percentage of those filling jobs in under two months falls to 64%. Those averaging more than 90 days, though, rises to almost 13%. Yet when you have only a handful of recruiters (2-9), the time to fill isn t so different: 68% fill roles in under 60 days 18% take less than a month. One particularly troubling statistic is the number of TA leaders reporting they either didn t know how long it takes to fill a job or they simply don t track it. They accounted for 6% of the respondents. 2

4 Backfills So much time is spent backfilling vacancies caused by attrition that it is a major cause of concern for talent acquisition leaders. They identified it as one of the leading reasons their department isn t as effective as they want. How much recruiting time is taken up by backfilling? Somewhere north of 40% for a majority of you and closer to 60% for many. Companies with fewer than 100 employees generally spend less time filling vacancies. 29% of our small company respondents spend 10% or less of their time on attrition. As company size increases, a greater percentage of our survey takers reported spending more recruiting time on backfills. Two particularly interesting data points jumped out: 1. Almost 70% of the very largest companies in our survey (100k+ workers) spend upwards of 40% on backfills; 41% of them spend more than 60% backfilling. 2. Just under 4% of the TA leaders say they don t know how much time is spent on backfills. That might be understandable if the bulk of the don t knows came from companies with very few recruiters. However, the biggest companies were the ones with the most don t knows. 3

5 Talent Advisor vs. Recruiter When we looked at how TA leaders graded their teams on their skills as talent advisors we, like our respondents, were encouraged at least initially. 72% of you said you were encouraged by the recruiting staff s opportunity to act as talent advisors to your hiring managers. In a related question, where we asked you to grade your team s skills as talent advisors, 63% of you gave them B or better. That s not bad, even if it leaves 37% with scores of C, D or F, though only 4% failed their teams. But here s how our survey defined a B grade: Proactive, show glimpses and eagerness of being consultative and strategic, but have a way to go Our ERE definition: What is a Talent Advisor? A trusted recruiting partner That s not quite a ringing endorsement of a team s talent advisor prowess. However, it is far better than what the C standard. TA leaders who handed out that grade agreed their team was Occasionally proactive problem solvers but not strategic, consultative, or considered advisors by your business When you think about that last part of the standard, it makes you wonder how a TA leader could give their team a passing grade (as minimal as it is) when they are agreeing that the business itself doesn t consider the recruiting staff to be an advisor. We also looked at how recruiters themselves scored things, and we found them to be very close to what their leaders thought. Then we looked at what the hiring managers thought, and here is where we found, what we call, The Big Disconnect. Who proactively provides consultation and strategic advisory support In the identification, attraction and consistent delivery of talent While continually improving the hiring process In support of the business mission. 4

6 The Big Disconnect Hiring managers see their recruiting teams very differently. In the previous section we noted that nearly three-quarters of TA leaders were encouraged by their teams opportunity to act as talent advisors. Hiring managers, however, are much less encouraged. Only 42% -- less than half said they were encouraged by their company s recruiters ability to act as talent advisors. Our survey probed a little deeper, asking hiring managers to score aspects of the recruiting process. Here are some of the things we found: They ranked the candidates they source themselves to be superior to the candidates you bring them. They placed the quality of these well ahead of all other sources but employee referrals, which they ranked second. Candidates who apply directly to job openings are only slightly less desirable than the passive candidates sourced by their recruiters. Candidates from social media sites the hot trend in corporate recruiting and those from agencies were ranked second to last and last respectively. 5

7 We also asked about communication between recruiter and hiring manager. On our Encouraged/Discouraged scale the majority (62%) said they were encouraged by their working relationships with recruiters/sourcers at (their) company. Taking that question one step further, we asked for some specifics about the level of reporting they get when they have a search underway. What we found told us hiring managers are more discouraged about communications than they are about their personal relationships with the recruiting team. Here s what they said: 26% have a tool giving them real time updates 15% get weekly status reports 33% say they get no updates at all 26% have to ask for reports and updates and when they get them, 15% say they are useless. That s 15% of all the responding hiring managers, not just those who must ask! So what kind of grade do you suppose hiring managers gave their corporate recruiting teams? Sevenin-ten hiring managers gave their teams a C or worse! There wasn t even one A handed out and only 30% thought their in-house recruiters worthy of a B. As poor a showing as that is, the three year trend is worse. When we asked this question on our first survey in 2014, hiring managers were more generous; 14% awarded their team an A. Just 1% failed their team. On our 2016 survey, 15% of hiring managers gave out a failing grade. If it s not already clear, the big disconnect is between how TA leaders and recruiters see the job they are doing and how hiring managers see things. Besides the differences in perception about their talent advisor role and who is responsible for bringing in the best talent, there s a wide gap between the grade TA gives itself and the overall grade your customers give you. 63% of TA leaders this year awarded their teams a B. The 27% grading themselves at a C brought the average GPA to a B-, but just by a hair. That hasn t changed much since our 2014 survey. Recruiters, who also scored themselves, agreed with their leaders; their As, Bs, Cs, Ds and Fs tracked closely. 6

8 Now What? The ERE 2016 State of Talent Acquisition Survey gives us some direction to improving the situation between talent acquisition and its hiring manager customers. Closing the gap between how you see the job and how your customers perceive you is entirely up to you. There are some simple, easy to implement fixes to the relationship. Among these are: 1. Reach out to hiring managers to get their feedback on your performance. You may need to use your best interviewing techniques to get at how they really feel. Point out to them that honesty and thoroughness will only help them by enabling you to source and submit better candidates more quickly. 2. Improve the quality of reports to your hiring managers and provide them useful, timely status updates when they have a search. 3. If you don t already track essential recruiting data, such as time to fill and cost of hire, do that now. 4. Benchmark your KPIs. You need to know how you compare and where you are strong, as well as weak Want To Know How You Measure Up? Try This Free, New Benchmarking Service TA Leaders are increasingly asked to do more with less. Stakeholders demand higher quality candidates at a lower cost. How is your company handling this challenge? How do you stack up against your competitors? ERE s Benchmarking gives you the insight you need to make these decisions. With it, you can identify where your company is over and underperforming the information you need to transform your TA department. Want to know more? Interested in trying it for yourself? Sign up for a free account today! 7