EVALUATING STAFFING PROCESS RESULTS 6
EVALUATINGSTAFFING PROCESS RESULTS
Thecompetitive edge and business success of any firm largely depends onthe quality performance and output of its employees. The organizationstaffing process should therefore plan effectively for theacquisition, deployment and retaining a workforce that is ofsufficient quality and quantity to achieve positive organizationgoals and overall effectiveness in service delivery. The staffingprocess needs to strategize on manpower acquisition process, which isthe core of valuable and effective workforce. This means identifyingthe firms’ manpower requirement in numbers, staffs attributes inrelation to skills, knowledge and abilities in order to leverage onthe job requirement. Manpower retention is an invaluable aspect forany HR management in a firm. It helps manage voluntary andinvoluntary migration of valued staffs through tactical and strategicmeasures to reduce loss and employment costs (Taylor & Schmidt,1983).
Overallthe staffing process encompasses manpower requirement assessment,recruitment, selection, orientation and placement, training anddevelopment, remuneration, performance evaluation, promotion andtransfer. This paper presents an evaluation analysis of staffingprocess results at Keepon Trucking Company (KTC) which hired 100 newassemblers for its manufacturing company. After filling the vacancieswhich were advertised through news paper ads, local employmentagency and employee referrals, offer receivers were given terms andconditions for their job. However, after one year of contract, thetrend of offer receivers versus initial applicants and retentionrates differed significantly as evaluated below.
Yieldratios, time lapse and retention rates associated with eachrecruitment source
Newspaperadverts Recruitment source
Accordingto thetabulateddata collected from Trucking Company (KTC), the yield ratio indicatesthat the numbers of applicants were higher compared to the offerreceivers in the ratio 300:70, 70/300 *100= 23%, only 50 applicantsstarted as new hires compared to the number of newspaper applicants,50:300, 50/300* 100= 17%. However, after a period of six months thenumber of new hires decreased to 35 employees in the ratio 300: 35,35/300* 100=12%. The time lapse of job offers for the news paperapplicants to the start dates was 30:10, 30-10=10. The retentionrates at the firm after a period of six months was 35 staffs comparedto 50 staffs who had started as new hires in the ratio 35:50, 35/50*100= 70%.
EmployeesReferrals Recruitment source
Fromthe tabulated data, the number of applicants to offer receivers was60: 30, the yield ratio was thus 30/60*100=50%, while the yield ratioof new hires versus applicants was 30: 60, 30/60*100=50%. Time lapsebetween days of offer and days of job starts was 10 days. In thiscase, the retention rate of the recruitment source after a period ofsix moths can be determined by calculating the percentage ofemployees after six moths to new hires who had been recruited 2730,27/30*100= 90%.
Employmentagency Recruitment source
Thedata retrieved indicated that 400 applicants were sourced from theemployment bureau but only 20 applicants were offer receivers,therefore the yield ratio is 20:400, 20/400*100=5%. The time cycletaken between days to offer and days to start was (20-10) 10 days.After a period of six months, the data indicates that, new assemblershired through the Employment agency had decreased to only 8 staffsfrom the 20 new hire figure 8:20, 8/20* 100=40%
Relativeeffectiveness of the sources in terms of yield ratios, cycle timesand retention rates
Accordingto the evaluation of staffing process of the three sources, the yieldratio is higher with the employee referral been 50% compared tonewspaper ads at 23% and employment agency at 5%. This indicatesthat, employee referrals in the recruitment of new assemblers wasbeneficial and more reliable compared to the other recruitmentchannels. Assessing the time lapse or cycle time taken in the days ofoffer to days of job start indicates that with newspaper ads thecycle time was longer (20 days) compared to the rest (10days each foremployee referrals and employment agency). This means that more timewas taken between the offer dates and date of job start.
Furtherto this, the retention rates were higher for staffs recruited throughEmployees referrals (90%), compared to Newspaper ads recruitedassemblers (70%) and the assemblers recruited through Employmentagency (40%). Given these retention rates, employee referral sourceof recruitment is more reliable source of employees with highretention rate followed by newspaper ads. Therefore, comparing theyield ratios, time lapse and retention rates, Employment Referralappear to be more effective compared to the rest source of staffrecruitment.
Possiblereasons for deferring in relative effectiveness of the three sources
Accordingto the evaluation analysis above, the differing effectiveness in thethree sources in regard to yield ratio, time cycle and retention ratecould be attributed to myriad of problems. Ideally, there could bedifferential relation between recruitment source and job tenureemployees’ referrals offers more conviction to new employees aboutthe organization (Taylor & Schmidt, 1983). For instance,employees referred to the organization by their friends or relativescould stay long in the organization based on the job link to theirfriends or relatives. This means that the employees could have hadmore inside information about the organization beforehand therebymaking a strong decision to work in the organization compared to thenew hires from other recruitment sources (Taylor & Schmidt,1983).
Farfrom this, the differential effectiveness on the three sources couldarise from the fact that the sources reach different populations andtherefore different expectations and yield ratio from the applicants.Similarly, its is more easier and cost effective to recruit employeesthrough referrals and employment agencies than advertising solelybecause the time cycle of advertisement and job start is long due tothe process involved. In summary, this falls under the realisticinformation and individual differences hypothesis which posits thatthe recruitment sources give varying amount of realistic information(Taylor & Schmidt, 1983).
Recommendationto Dexter on improving future evaluation of the staffing process
Infuture, Dexter needs to assess the recruitment methods associatedwith the different recruitment sources since they are associated withvarying employee attributes, motivation, and the level of realisticinformation provided. Similarly, before and after any newrecruitment, Dexter needs to carry out performance appraisals toascertain employees feedback based on job tasks, remuneration andoverall motivation in the job performance.
Taylor,M.S. and Schmidt, D.W. (1983). ‘Aprocess-oriented investigation of recruitment source effectiveness.’Personnel Psychology, 36, 343-354. MA: Addison-Wesley PublishingCompany, Print