Where is the Value?

I think it is safe to say that communication in many aspects of our daily life is the difference-maker. For example, quality communication can help a marriage blossom into a lifetime of love and growth. While poor communication can suck the love out of a marriage. Then we get into the semantics of what constitutes "quality communication". It might be easier to describe what poor communication looks like. Either way, it requires a conversation. One place I have found strong communication is a massive difference-maker is in talent management, especially during recruitment and selection. The semantics matter and taking the time to ensure all parties involved have a clear understanding saves time, money, and resources. I bring this up because I don't understand why organizations hire Managed Service Providers to operate their talent management systems when part of what they do is limit communication. They manage the process by restricting vendors' contact with hiring managers and require vendors to blindly submit to a job posting. I say blindly because how much can you really get out of the 10-page job description with five of the pages of "nice to have." Even the individual who created the job description knows the odds of finding someone who possesses all of the skills, knowledge, and abilities listed is a long shot at best. Furthermore, the majority of job descriptions are out of date and poorly designed. To make things worse, Managed Service Providers, then make it a race. They hold vendors accountable to submit a candidate to at least 90% of job postings, following the rate card, and within 72 hours. It focuses on speed and cost, two components that while are relative are far from the most important criteria a talent vendor should be evaluated on. Lets recap, Managed Service Providers, limit communication talent suppliers can have with hiring managers, and expect them to turn around talent quickly and at a discount. Talent suppliers have no opportunity to learn about the team, its subcultures, the strategy, the exciting projects they will be working on, or the cool opportunities to grow their skill set. So when the prospective talent asks questions, the recruiters either lie, embellish, or don't answer them because they never had the opportunity to communicate with the hiring manager. If an organization truly wants to hire top talent, this is precisely what they should avoid doing. Why would any skilled individual want to waste their time with a recruiting firm or organization that is shooting in the dark? Managed Service Providers sell their services to organizations by framing it in a way that they give hiring managers back their time (by controlling the vendors) and save the organization money with rate cards (among other financial tactics). How do I know this, I used to be in the front lines selling it. At the time, I truly believed it was a quality service offering. I will admit I was naïve and was living in a confirmation bias world. If an organization indeed views talent as the difference-maker, they would not partner with a managed service firm. Instead, they can build a quality talent management strategy and structure internally. Then interview and select a few talent suppliers to partner with internal resources. For example, say an organization budgets $10m on contingent workers (an employee that is not full time) and $10M for full-time workers. The organization reviews its internal resources and identify they do not have the bandwidth to conduct the recruitment and selection by themselves. They can identify 5-6 talent suppliers, interview them, and select three to partner with for the year. Set parameters around expectations, communication channels, and a performance appraisal to measure them by. This type of arrangement benefits all parties involved. From a talent supplier standpoint, they are guaranteed an opportunity at $10M in revenue and, at worst, should be able to get $1M in revenue. That is an excellent year for any recruiter or account manager. The organization just became three Account Managers, most valuable account. The account managers will give extra attention, effort, and truly get an opportunity to learn what type of talent works best within the organization's culture. If the suppliers perform and the talent needs remain the same for the following year, then you sign another agreement with the suppliers. If a supplier does not deliver, choose another supplier to take their place the following year. From an organization standpoint, you have true partners. The talent suppliers will invest in getting to know the organization and delivering quality resources. Meaning the talent supplier will allocate (or at least should in theory) their top recruiters to the job requirements from their firm. Also, they become a fantastic marketing tool for the organization. On average, recruiters will talk to between 20-45 prospects a week. When they speak with the prospects, they can be honest with them about the relationship with the organization, answer any questions the prospects may have, and provide honest and quality feedback to the organization about their reputation in the market place. There are, of course, more benefits that I am not going over here for both the organizations and the talent suppliers, but I think you get the point. It's a pure win, win, win scenario. The final win is for the talent prospects. Recruiters can do a better job finding quality talent and courting them. Organizations can spend quality time interviewing top prospects. At the end of the day, talent is never on sale. It takes time to recruit and select individuals that have the knowledge, abilities, and skills to perform the job. In addition, identifying if they are a fit for the organization's structure and environment. Managed Service Providers sell empty promises to organizations. They waste organizations' time by confusing busy with productive, and pocket the "financial savings" by bleeding talent suppliers, and more importantly, the prospects of fair pay. Even if Managed Service Providers do on paper save organizations money, organizations end up paying for it later by having to rebuild their reputation in the marketplace. A-players talk to A-players, and it doesn't take long for the message to travel. The illusion that Managed Service Providers sell is a hustle and provides no value to anyone in the market place. It always surprises me how much time and resources organizations will spend to create an organizational strategy and plans to execute it, but then short change their talent strategy. The talent takes the abstract and makes it a reality. Regardless of the mission and strategy, talent is required to execute it. Don't be fooled by the illusion of Managed Service Providers, and give your future talent the time and resources required.