Vale a pena poupar no Recrutamento?

Tenho um vizinho que construiu a sua casa durante cinco anos. Todos lhe disseram que talvez ele devesse contratar um empreiteiro para construir a casa imediatamente? Mas ele disse que preferia poupar o dinheiro e que o construiria ele próprio. Hoje em dia, ele tenta vender a casa, mesmo que ainda não esteja acabada. Ele investiu muito dinheiro nela ao longo dos anos. O seu preço de venda cobre apenas metade dos investimentos. Mas mesmo assim não há compradores. Se calcular o custo total do trabalho, gasolina, materiais, e tempo perdido, pode ver que o vizinho poderia apenas pedir emprestado o dinheiro necessário para uma construção adequada, contratar uma equipa de construtores e viver na mansão construída durante 5 anos, tendo a oportunidade de pagar todos os empréstimos há muito tempo. Olhando para esta história, surge a questão: vale a pena poupar e tentar fazer tudo sozinho, se como resultado, as despesas globais se revelarem muito mais significativas?

No matter how much a company wishes to hire employees without spending it still has to pay in the end. To begin with, you will have to pay for sites about work, spend time on interviews, and hire a recruiter (HR manager) or a recruitment agency. The plan of recruitment, training, and adaptation of employees is the cornerstone of any company and unreasonable economy on it can pose serious problems for such frugal companies in the future. It's bad when the company does not have a “time to hire” standard. It is even worse if there are two stages of hiring: when an employee is needed "yesterday", and when "an employee is no longer needed".

While the top managers might know perfectly well what losses the company will suffer in the absence of sales managers, experienced warehouse manager or a service manager, they can be completely unaware of the losses due to the lack of a secretary, a purchasing manager, or an accountant. "Well, why should I hire another accountant? I will just distribute the work among other employees!"

Muitas pessoas ignoram o facto de que, com o tempo, a falta de um empregado se tornará evidente. Outros empregados podem não ter tempo suficiente para completar todas as tarefas, e as novas responsabilidades podem resultar em horários de trabalho irregulares, erros, e mesmo demissões. E então a organização irá sofrer muito mais perdas do que o salário de um contabilista.

Trying to save on essentials almost always has an adverse affect on a company: for example, if the company is trying to find personnel using a website with vacancies without having a recruiter in the state or resorts to employing a recruitment agency then such an organization risks to miss all deadlines for hiring which in turn can affect business processes. Reasonable economy implies the choice: in general, companies (who want to save money) have an HR manager on staff and additionally they employ a recruitment agency. The benefits of such savings are obvious: a reduction time to hire, as well as the ability to keep track of the process of hiring. The HR managers, as a rule, have some "workload", other tasks, in addition to the hiring process, which does not prevent them from meeting deadlines and conduct interviews.

In conclusion, it should be noted that recruitment is a key element of any organization, and if the organization is large enough then it becomes a separate business process. Saving on essentials can "go sideways" and lead to serious losses for the company in the future. Savings can only be reasonable.