Going in-house

"If it isn't broken, don't break it" is a sensible theory, because the first thing you need to make certain before embarking on a major change to your recruitment process is that any realignment doesn't threaten existing arrangements. There's a very real danger that, if handled poorly or based upon purely financial drivers, any change in recruitment processes for a given company may have catastrophic effects on the business.

The American employment market is often the trend setter in terms of new methodology and innovative business techniques. American recruitment agencies were initially specialists, dedicating their services to core vertical markets and quickly dominating their areas of concern. Economic conditions and huge growth provided greater opportunity and, consequently, the recruitment market diversified and became multi-functional (supplying the needs of a variety of business sectors and skill sets).

Since then, we have seen the birth of huge multi-national recruitment businesses that provide a full service to all business areas. With global economic slowdown, business has sought to control the spiralling costs of the support services – and the recruitment industry has been a major target. This mindset has duly made its way 'across the pond' and pervaded the UK. As such, we've witnessed the birth of the internal recruitment function.

In its purest form, this recruitment method is cost-effective, dedicated and professional, but in truth the main driver for it is financial as opposed to operational concern. Consequently, the internal recruitment process is failing.

Within the UK, the security sector has welcomed the internal recruitment function because it appears to be cheap. Historically, internal recruiters are security personnel that have been identified as better-than-average communicators. However, they often possess no formal training in recruitment procedures, interviewing techniques or employment law, but are nonetheless thrust into a role whose success or failure can affect the growth of the entire business.

Such individuals are often burdened still further with the added responsibility of pre-employment screening which, even for the most gifted of administrators, will result in a dilution of performance.

In-house: the methodology
Typical in-house recruitment methodology is to place a non-innovative advertisement into the national, regional or trade press and, based upon an unsatisfactory result, repeat that same procedure the following week or month. That is a vicious circle wherein the advertisement will only attract generic job seekers that are often of a poor quality. The internal recruiter, then, is working hard but isn't working smart.

That said, successful internal recruitment functions do exist. Typically, they're born out of successful international business models that recognise internal recruitment is not the cheaper option but the preferred option. Professional recruitment is expensive. That's a fact of life which doesn't change whether the process is external or internal.

Recruiters must be trained in the latest techniques. They must have access to the necessary support structures (advertising, IT, recruitment database/software) and be incentivised financially for what they do. By bringing the function in-house, the business can benefit in many ways – but the short-term financial gain is negligible.

An in-house recruiter must bring professionalism to the hiring process for an organisation. He or she should be involved directly with the Personnel Department in the identification of internal requirements, dealing with line management on a personal basis. The function should control the process from inception through to the employment of the most suitable candidate.

Ultimately, the internal recruitment function ought to look at retention as well as recruitment. With so many employers failing to retain talented security operatives, the idea of 're-recruitment' is essentially about encouraging people to make an active decision to stay with you. The aim of the internal recruitment function is to remove this responsibility from other areas of the business, and allow them to concentrate on their own operational responsibilities.

Burden of responsibility
At present, the major weakness in the security sector is that internal recruitment functions are basically a telephone answering service with little or no involvement in the selective element of the role. Consequently, line managers are burdened with additional responsibility. The result of this strategy is extra costs and a loss of operational effectiveness.

Experience shows that the most effective internal recruitment functions are those that act as the hub of all communication concerning matters of employment and hiring, but that maintain open relationships with external agencies dependent upon the priorities of the vacancies involved. These functions are incentivised to reduce recruitment costs over an agreed period of time, but also recognise that their role is mainly to attract the strongest candidates for the business.

The financial benefits arise through the creation of preferred operating rates with recruitment partners, direct advertising deals and a reduction in the dependence upon agencies for non-strategic roles.

A professional business that's serious about its growth must budget for the worse case scenario in recruitment terms, which means a dependency on agency services. Recruitment of personnel in the security sector is generally based upon immediate requirement and finding the best person for the job. Clearly, this requirement needs to be measured by the costs involved, but at present a dropping of standards is all-too-common. Once again, the business as a whole will suffer.

For the manned security sector, recruitment is one of the key business areas. That's true of any industry whose 'product' is people-centric, but instead of making recruitment the focus of operations (and one that's staffed by the most competent employees), the security sector often views the procedure as an opportunity to cut costs. The end result of that is inevitable.

So what's the best route to market?
Our advice to SMT's readers? A dedicated in-house recruitment function is extremely beneficial. Staff it with able, fully-trained recruitment professionals that are motivated financially – and by career progression – and the result will be immediately obvious.

Your standard of employee will increase dramatically, and your recruitment process become professional – allowing line management to focus on business growth.

You'll always need the services of an external recruitment agent, but your dependence upon that service will be reduced and become far more selective. In reality, the internal and external functions should operate hand-in-glove.