Is Recruitment Really the Heart of HR? Seeking Insights on Industry Trends

Hi All,

Well, the seniors and forum members who know me will understand why I am posting this topic :) but I actually needed to know the reason behind this trend that I have come across and maybe others may not have, or the potential HR professionals may come across...

Off late, I have been wondering, is Recruitment synonymous with HR in the industry, or is it the most important aspect of HR, or the only scale to measure an HR's potential? The reason I will tell you is that whenever you come across any job posting for potential HR professionals (0 to 3 years), the posting says needed HR Executive/Recruiter, or even if the ad has HR Executive as the header, the job description spoils it.

Further to add to my belief, the other day my HR manager and I were discussing filling in some positions where I expressed that I am not enjoying this part of the job, to which his reply was, "Dear, Recruitment is HR!" Though I shouldn't have taken it seriously considering that he is a technical background person, I was left wondering, "To excel in the industry, do you think it is necessary to specialize primarily in one section of it?"

Please let me know your opinion on this, and if I am wrong, do correct me.

Warm Regards,

Geeti

Hi Geeti,

This problem is faced by many HR personnel.

Recruitment is not synonymous with HR, but yes, it is surely a very important function of HR.

Until you recruit a good candidate, you won't be able to perform other functions of HR effectively. If a good candidate is selected for a job, half the battle is won, but I believe that Manpower planning is a more valuable function than recruiting.

It is only with half-knowledge in the HR field that people start considering recruitment as the core of HR. No, if we focus solely on recruitment, what will happen to all the other major functions? You cannot neglect them:

- Manpower planning
- Budgeting
- Selection
- Induction
- Performance Management
- Training & Development – it has become a separate area of focus now, indicating its increasing importance in recent years.
- Management development
- Career Planning and Development
- Appraisals, OD, Change Management, OB, people management, retention, WLB, etc.

The list is extensive; you can't just recruit a person and then forget about it. The real work of HRM begins after the selection process.

I encourage others to contribute as well.

Cheers,

Archna

Hi Archna,

Thank you for providing the details and reaching a consensus with me on this. I still want to know, do you also feel the way I do, that currently, the trend is HR = Recruitment...?

Warm Regards,
Geeti

Hi Geeti,

Nice to see you back in action.

As usual, Archna is correct and there's no dispute at all. Recruitment is the primary function of HR from where all other functions like selection, development, and separation emerge. At present, there is a misconception among many that only Recruitment or Training & Development are treated as the only HR functions. A lot of fragmentation has taken place as a result of which this kind of misconception has taken place. In another thread going around in the forum, I clearly stated that due to recruitment frenzy, some organizations and HR personnel have almost started ignoring the function of antecedent check and checking of credentials properly. As a result, many candidates are getting employed without being properly relieved from their previous organizations, resulting in dual employment which goes against the terms and conditions of service or the standing orders.

HR as a whole has a lot to do other than recruitment or training, provided you have the right kind of management coupled with a congenial environment.

Thanks,

PRADEEP

Hi Pradeep,

Thanks for the reply. Yes, I am getting back in action :)

I am in agreement with you on the fact that reference checks and credentials checks are not given importance in the hurry to recruit. The latest case to support this would be the bulk sacking of employees at Wipro after more than 2 years of service. I faced a similar situation in my organization recently. We had a false acceptance by a candidate for one position. Interestingly, the same candidate mistakenly sent his resume for a different position, and the resumes we received were completely different but with the same contact details. Initially, reference checks were a part of our recruitment process, but the rush to recruit candidates led to the avoidance of the same.

After deviating from the main issue, I still haven't received responses from many members in the forum who work in the same line, believing that "Recruitment equals HR in the current industry."

Warm Regards,
Geeti

Dear Seniors,

Your opinions and advice are needed. Kindly shed some light on this topic.

Warm Regards,
Geeti

Hi Geeti,

I think recruitment is definitely an important aspect of an HR's role because once an HR understands the recruited profile, it becomes easier to comprehend the further needs of the recruited person, such as their training and development needs. Basically, when a person is recruited by the HR, a relationship is already established between the candidate and the recruiter, creating a comfortable situation. However, recruitment alone will not address all needs; it must be supported by resolving employee grievances, fostering a good and healthy working environment within the company, and enhancing development activities. If these issues are not properly addressed, even the best candidate recruited will not reduce attrition in the company. Therefore, all facets of HR work hand in hand.

Regards, Pooja

Dear Ms. Geeti,

As far as my knowledge goes, the reason why people consider recruitment as the main job for HR is because we are the individuals responsible for every good or bad aspect. The most important thing behind it is that everyone, except HR, thinks that we have no work at all. We are perceived as being paid just to recruit people and manage their salaries, etc.

There is a need for a change in this attitude. I sincerely believe that we, as HR professionals, are capable of solving many significant problems but often fall short in presenting ourselves and articulating our importance.

If you believe I am mistaken, please let me know.

Santosh Iyer

I agree with Archna and Pradeep that recruitment is not the only paramount responsibility for an HR Manager. It definitely is one of his prime responsibilities, considering that the only way an organization can prosper and grow is through the strengths and capabilities of its people, and to recruit the right people is very important.

But just think a little. Why is recruitment becoming so important?

First of all, the younger generation has very little responsibilities towards their employers. The moment they get a better paying job, they walk out without a second thought, leaving the organization at wit's end to get a replacement as fast as possible.

Why is this happening? Organizations are not paying enough attention to motivating and retaining the people they need. Motivation and job enrichment must be such that employees should WANT to stick around. Retention policies like extended responsibilities, promotional prospects, self-development, training and development, non-quantifiable benefits like house and vehicle loans, etc. also play a critical role.

Recruitment itself is being done haphazardly. Not many HR Managers really have in-depth discussions with functional heads to find out why people are leaving, nor do they analyze job descriptions and job content to check whether these are attractive enough to pull in candidates, nor do they spend sufficient time on the actual recruitment process to ensure that the right candidates are selected.

As Geeti pointed out, if you hurry recruitments, you make mistakes ... like not checking references or facts provided.

And what HR Managers also fail to realize is the hidden cost of recruitments. When a vacancy occurs, HR Managers have to spend time, trouble, and effort on
* analyzing and if necessary, redesigning job descriptions and job content
* advertising/going to recruitment consultants
* spending time on going through applications and testing their veracity (correctness)
* interviewing those found suitable
* negotiating terms and giving letters of appointment
* waiting for them to actually join after serving out their notice periods (unless they are unemployed)
* giving them induction training
* waiting until they start producing.

And looking for a replacement if they suddenly decide to leave.

And during all this time, the functional heads are fuming because their work is being held up!

So, a lot of in-depth thought has to be given to these problems, and steps to rectify matters taken at the earliest if matters are to improve.

What do you think?

Jeroo

Hi,

I do agree with Jerry and all the others. Even if the HR Manager makes all the innovations in the workplace, it is ultimately the functional head who is the boss (the employee reports to the functional head). And as we know, people leave the managers, not companies (as has been repeatedly pointed out in the forum).

HR Managers are under constant pressure from the Functional Heads to provide them with manpower faster. So, does the HR Manager have the time to check all the credentials of the new recruits? Basically, only the technical background is checked, none of the HR angles.

Lastly, to answer the question raised in the forum, "Recruitment is not the only thing in HR." It is the perspective of your boss/HR Managers as to how they look at HR. I believe recruiting is part of HR but not all of HR in today's environment.

Regards

Hi Jeroo,

Thanks for the detailed analysis. I do agree with you that the reasons for turnover and their analysis need to be paid much attention, and then effective measures to take care of the situation. However, I am currently stuck at a crucial point. Unless I fill the position currently in hand, I won't be able to brand HR in my organization. I hope you understand what I mean.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts with me.

Warm Regards,
Geeti

Hi Santosh,

Thanks for replying. Well, you are not at all wrong. I am in full agreement with you that there is a lot more to HR than just recruitment. That's the reason why I posted this message initially 😃 as I am still facing trouble on this front.

Thanks & Regards,
Geeti

Dear Geeti,

A good topic for discussion, I would say. To start with, recruitment is said to be the heart of HR functions. As far as I know, every HR professional should know the recruitment procedure because, "If you don't know how to recruit the right candidate for your organization, you would never be able to retain him or her." This is what I have come to understand.

Earlier, there were no such attrition rates that the current HR is facing. From A++ graded organizations to small and booming businesses, this problem is being faced, and recruitment, already an important function or the heart of HR, has now gained very great importance due to factors such as attrition rates, rapid expansion, or companies entering the retailing industry. The reasons are many. However, most candidates entering HR will definitely come across the phase you are in now, something I used to experience earlier. So, in simple terms, new individuals entering HR usually start with recruitment. If you are involved in employee relations and the recruitment part of HR, I believe it can offer an excellent path for advancement in HR.

"Recruitment = Human Resource is the current Industry Trend?"

You may encounter the above sentiment if you are with a branded organization where some specialists exclusively focus on recruitment, while other HR functions are handled by a separate group within the HR department. In smaller or medium-sized organizations, individuals will likely have the opportunity to explore various HR functions alongside recruitment. Recruitment is undoubtedly of growing importance in any organization, but HR does not solely revolve around recruitment. Some HR professionals may feel this way because, as recruitment gains importance, management is hiring individuals solely for recruitment purposes. This management strategy somehow contributes to these sentiments.

This is my perspective. Please feel free to suggest if I am mistaken.

Regards,

Kiran.

Hi,

In IT/ITES/Start-up companies/Companies on vigorous expansion mode - YES, recruitment is HR as HR spends most of the time in recruitment because it is the need of the hour. It is not the case in every company/every industry.

Jeeva.

Hi Jeeya,

What you said is very true; HR in the IT/ITES companies spends most of the time in recruitment, and that is the reason these IT/ITES companies have maximum attrition. If the companies shift their emphasis by 30% on other functions, there will be much fewer problems.

Cheers,
Archna

Hi all,

Recruitment does not represent the whole HR function at all. Yes, it may be one aspect of the HR Department, but it certainly does not encompass the plethora of activities carried out by HR. Recruitment is a part of Staffing, which falls under Manpower Planning in HR. Therefore, it is a sub-module.

Within Recruitment, a recent trend is the outsourcing of CV validations. This practice helps save a significant amount of time and monetary costs. Consequently, the HR department of an organization can focus more on strategic functions.

Dheeraj

Hi all,

Thanks for your reply.

Well, Kiran, as you said, attrition and retention are at an all-time high now, and that's what led to increased emphasis on recruitment, outdoing its initial importance as an HR function. However, I feel that what needs to be taken care of is attrition rather than recruitment. If attrition is not controlled, the employees will never stay; hence, that is the key issue that needs to be resolved.

I am sure you will agree that losing an employee with experience and knowledge is a bigger blow to an organization than mass recruitment, given that attrition generates recruitment. However, an increase in recruitment depending on future flow of the company's business is no doubt essential.

The above is open for suggestions and comments.

Hi Jeeva,

Thanks for your opinion. However, I support Archana's view on this, and the same is reflected in what I have written above.

Warm regards,
Geeti

Hi Geeti,

It was interesting to read your query. I would like to put forth my opinion in this regard. The role of Recruitment is misconstrued by many as the entire HR Function, whereas it is only a subset of HR. However, this interpretation varies from industry to industry and their activities.

Today, HR is practiced in totality in industries like FMCG, Banking and Finance, Manufacturing, etc. The role of HR has nowadays minimized in IT and ITES Sectors. These industries are more recruitment-centric than HR-centric. The entire business model of these industries is designed to have developed in such a fashion that Recruitment takes prominence over HR. Hence, the activities and initiatives that you can normally undertake with the help of HRM or HRD perspective somehow get sidelined, and Recruitment plays a major role.

I have read comments of some professionals in response to your query, and someone has pointed out something about Manpower Planning. I beg to differ on these lines as Manpower Planning is a part of Resourcing activity. To elaborate, Recruitment is a major activity in HR. Recruitment and Resourcing generally go hand in hand depending upon the business model of an IT company. When we talk about Manpower planning, we are actually talking about resource allocation, pricing, profitability, and availability of resources vis-a-vis the Project earnings or revenue.

The opinions mentioned here are purely personal and not intended to challenge and/or demean any individual.

Thanks and Regards,

Kuldeep Singh

Geeti,

I am not very sure what you are still looking for. You have received quite a few very good replies, and the gist is that recruitment is not the only responsibility of an average HR Manager. See also my earlier post.

If you are in an industry where constant recruitment/attrition takes place, like in a BPO, then only would you need special HR personnel looking only after recruitment. Even then, they have to be trained how to recruit effectively; otherwise, you end up by recruiting the wrong people, letting them go, and re-recruiting their replacements. A solid waste of time, effort, and money.

Also, where you are going in for a large number of recruitments constantly, it might be better to recruit a separate junior executive who is only concerned with verifying addresses, qualifications, and references - I don't mean of every applicant, however! See the case below:

If you are interviewing a candidate, and you feel he might be suitable, tell the candidate that you would be verifying the info contained in his application, and that if anything is falsely represented, then you would not be considering him for employment, and even if he joins in the meantime, his appointment would be immediately terminated. If he accepts these terms, then have his application verified by the junior executive (see above).

Are other HR Managers finding the same problem with falsified applications?

If so, are you doing anything about it, and if so, what?

It might be interesting to find out.

Other than the above, Geeti, I do not know what else I can say.

Jeroo

Hi Kuldeep,

Thanks for the input.

Hi Jeroo,

I am not looking for much here. I have a decent understanding of what I wanted to know. Thanks for your input. I am looking forward to meeting you at one of CHR's national conclaves.

Warm Regards,
Geeti

Hi Geeti,

I also hope we can meet when a national conference is called, or if you are to visit Mumbai, give a call! In the meantime, I am still waiting for replies to my queries posted earlier. Are other HR Managers finding the same problem with falsified applications? If so, are you doing anything about it, and if so, what? It might be interesting to find out.

Jeroo