This is a good question in that it helps to define the role of a Sourcer by the contemporary standards associated with recruiting. Wikipedia defines the sourcing function as it relates to recruiting as "...the identification and uncovering of candidates (also known as talent) through proactive recruiting techniques." (Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sourcing_%28personnel%29). Wikipedia also states that historically sourcing was the sole and inclusive responsibility of the recruiter along with other job responsibilities such as screening and interviewing candidates against the position requirements, developing talent within a pipeline, working closely with the hiring manager on hiring activities and helping with the "offer letter" and interview process.

These definitions are important because as the various functions of recruitment become ever more specialized (the assumption of specialization being to bring efficiency and flexibility to the overall process), the duties, responsibilities and goals must in net effect help achieve the goal of successful recruitment and retention of Human Capital. Ambiguity would only lead to inefficiency within the process. For example, a situation involving a Recruiter working with a specialized Sourcer could lead to a duplication of efforts and incongruent or even incompatible methodology’s if the roles and duties of each are not defined. Clearly this would be cause for a frustrating, inefficient relationship between the two functions.

So, considering the ever evolving definition in today's market of what a Sourcing professional is, I would venture the answer to this particular question is that a good Sourcing professional does not necessarily develop talent in their pool of candidates as they would be otherwise solely involved in the identification and screening of the required Human Capital. This specialized function would allow for a streamlined process of feeding recruiters only those individuals that truly qualify for a specific position, allowing recruiters to intelligently and competently (one hopes) focus on other pertinent duties, such as development of talent.

But, as with all things in life, the distinctions between the various roles associated with recruitment are in flux and dynamic depending on the particular situation. In my opinion, as long as the overall process brings about a mutually satisfying end, the means can be said to be the important minutiae that is best left to be fleshed out between the party’s involved.

It’s all situational.

Author:

Harpreet Mroke