Comment by Dean Da Costa on February 21, 2012 at 2:55am

I guess you guys forgot to read the last part, let me help you again.

"The key here is to remember just because there is a problem in staffing does not mean it is the recruiter or the ATS, or the Staffing process."

The point of the post was that when you think of PPS as it relates to staffing remember there are people, process, and systems that impact staffing that you might not realize that could cause problems if not working right, do not just think of the easy things or the thigns that are labled staffing. Remember there is more than just recruiters invovled, more than just ATS systems, etc. Sometimes the problem lay in areas not usually thought about when talking about staffing.

 

Comment by Valentino Martinez on February 21, 2012 at 3:10am

Can't it also be said that anything that goes right in Staffing comes down to PPS as you describe it?

Isn't that like saying, "No matter where you go, there you are"?.

Comment by Dean Da Costa on February 21, 2012 at 12:25pm

Yes and no, my point was, that normally when something is wrong in staffing, managers tend to look only at the immediate staffing orientated PPS. The do not look at the contributing PPS.

Example, I worked for a company as a consultant, they asked me to come in and find out what was wrong with their process. Why was it so hard and took so long to hire. They presumed it was the recruiters. After doing my analysis it became clear to me that they did to consider the hiring manager or the support systems, as part of the PPS in anyway. Once I explained to them about my thinking on PPS, and we then analyzed what was going on to include the things I consider part of the PPS for staffing it became clear the problem was with the hiring managers and support systems, not the recruiters. In addition to a problem with the hiring managers, there was also a problem with connections between the HRIS and the finance systems. They were not talking correctly forcing hires to be stalled and in some cases even lost due to it taking so long for the systems to show everything. In this companies case there were over 30 different computer systems/software programs involved in the complete Staffing Lifecycle (SLC). Add to that there was 28 subsystems needed to allow all the primary ones to talk with each other. It was a mess. The point was they saw a problem with hirring assumed it was in staffing and only looked at the direct staffing PPS, not the support or outlining PPS. Again hence "The key here is to remember just because there is a problem in staffing does not mean it is the recruiter or the ATS, or the staffing process." Also why I explained for every part of the PPS what I meant, and made sure to include some of those outlining, support and seldom thought about PPSs.

So I hope that clarifies things and thank you for a constructive reply :)

Comment