HR Departments Reducing Shareholder’s Value

OK…my first rant. I realize the last person you want to contact when trying to place an accomplished, multi-award winning National Sales Director for competing billion dollar biotech company is an HR person. However, at times, when Sales Officers of the company are unreachable… it happens ... at least prior to searching for the right person.

This particular company had a position suitable for my candidate and I’m convinced (since I’ve worked with her and could attest) this candidate would have an immediate impact on their bottom line revenue, due to the fact that she is currently working for a competing company and her accolades can wall paper any office – including attaining the #1 region in the country (Rev to Budget).

I conveyed this to the HR person after she mindlessly repeated that they are not accepting any more vendors, and recommended she apply directly on their website … ARRRGGG!

The difference between the response from an HR person and the potential VP of Sales is the very reason for which HR is a detriment to a company’s PPS. HR is trapped in their “procedural vendor box,” while a Sales Officer would have zeroed in on the candidate’s contribution to the quarterly earnings report to Wall Street.

But I knew this going into this call. I’m just amazed that HR departments are allowed to be “vendor-centric” when it comes to revenue-generating candidates.

I’d love to hear from any corporate recruiters as to why such a yawning chasm of disconnect exists.

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Michael Katz on September 27, 2008 at 2:06pm

Hi Dan,
I could not agree with you more. I am also on the agency side, and as equally frustrated with HR. We place full-time IT folks mostly in the North East region. Here's a sample of what we go through: Company on Long Island needs a Manager with very specific IT development skill-set. Hiring manager has had this opening for *four months*. Hiring Manager refers us to HR, will not deal with us unless we are on the 'list'. We approach HR, HR LIES to us and says 'we just made someone an offer a week ago', we have no recourse because we are not on the vendor list. This despite the fact that we have candidates for this position.

HR's great vendor list has not been able to produce a candidate for FOUR MONTHS.
But HR is so afraid to relinquish the only power they have, they can not admit that someone outside of the company (ME) can tell them how to do their job. Complaining up the chain doesn't work either, senior management will rarely let a vendor tell them what's wrong with their incompetent HR team.

The bottom line unfortunately, and I will surely get hated-on for this, but people END-UP in HR, very few people choose that as a career, those that do choose HR are not BUSINESS people they are more likely from an IO Psych Program which teaches them how to pretend to be psychologists in the workplace.

For those that simply end-up in HR, regrettably, they have usually been moved from sales/finance/accounting as an under-performer. Hence when something like a vendor list comes along, it represents validation and power to these folks and is clung to in a vice-grip. Alas, choosing agencies does not require an IO Psych degree, we all provide the same service, at the same rates, from the same candidate pools. There is no discernible product difference between Manpower and Mom&Pop Recruiting Inc. Only in delivery. You would think the recruiter with candidates to deliver would prevail, but no.