One of the most common debates about the hiring process is whether you should keep it in-house or send it out to a recruiting agency.
Which is really better? Like everything, both methods have their advantages. Your unique hiring needs might mean there’s an obvious choice.
You Want the Wheel
Some people argue using a recruiting agency results in a loss of control. If you turn hiring over to outsiders, you’ll have less say about the people you hire. Don’t forget you still have full control over hiring decisions. The recruiters can make as many recommendations as they like, but you don’t have to hire any of them.
You have less control over the procedures and strategies the recruiter uses. A good recruiter involves you in strategy planning and discussions about how they’re going to recruit for you.
An obvious advantage of keeping …show more content…
It only makes sense. No outsider knows your company like you do.
Your expansive knowledge of company values and culture makes it more likely you’ll hire people who fit well with your company. Your recruiter may struggle a bit more since they don’t have the same knowledge. It’s one reason you might decide to keep hiring in-house.
Good communication can alleviate this concern if you do team up with a recruitment agency for your hiring needs. Your recruiter has a better chance of finding the right people if you tell them what you’re looking for.
You’re Risk Averse
Hiring someone new is a risk. You might think you’ve found the best person only to realize they don’t fit with your corporate culture. If you only hire a few times a year, you run the risk of not being able to find the people you need when you need them.
Hiring often seems like a slow process because your in-house procedures aren’t well-oiled machines. They’ll get the job done, but it may not be the most efficient or effective way of getting someone new on the
Which is really better? Like everything, both methods have their advantages. Your unique hiring needs might mean there’s an obvious choice.
You Want the Wheel
Some people argue using a recruiting agency results in a loss of control. If you turn hiring over to outsiders, you’ll have less say about the people you hire. Don’t forget you still have full control over hiring decisions. The recruiters can make as many recommendations as they like, but you don’t have to hire any of them.
You have less control over the procedures and strategies the recruiter uses. A good recruiter involves you in strategy planning and discussions about how they’re going to recruit for you.
An obvious advantage of keeping …show more content…
It only makes sense. No outsider knows your company like you do.
Your expansive knowledge of company values and culture makes it more likely you’ll hire people who fit well with your company. Your recruiter may struggle a bit more since they don’t have the same knowledge. It’s one reason you might decide to keep hiring in-house.
Good communication can alleviate this concern if you do team up with a recruitment agency for your hiring needs. Your recruiter has a better chance of finding the right people if you tell them what you’re looking for.
You’re Risk Averse
Hiring someone new is a risk. You might think you’ve found the best person only to realize they don’t fit with your corporate culture. If you only hire a few times a year, you run the risk of not being able to find the people you need when you need them.
Hiring often seems like a slow process because your in-house procedures aren’t well-oiled machines. They’ll get the job done, but it may not be the most efficient or effective way of getting someone new on the