It is not in a good tone for an HR Manager or a Specialist to reach directly a candidate who is placed high in the structures of competing companies. I omit the ethical aspect. After all, it is not fair that we are trying to drag a candidate to our side, and thus weaken the competitive company. It is different if an external consultant takes care of it. While the result is the same, it looks much more elegant to hire such a candidate.
Theoretically, you can do everything yourself, but in some cases, it can cost us a lot. Exactly, or a lot? How much exactly? Company CEOs, pressed to the wall by a weak economy, focus only on numbers. Therefore, only numbers can convince them to lift the recruitment blockade, which the headquarters very often assumed, even in a situation where the Polish branch was generating profits. And here I have great news for you. Well, the recruitment costs can be easily converted.
The gross hourly rate of the HR Manager’s work is 50% lower than the gross hourly rate of the head hunter’s work. Regardless of who will be recruiting, the direct supervisor and the n-1 director will be involved in the recruitment process. The costs of induction training will have to be borne in each case. After summing up the numbers, the amount under the head hunter cost bar turns out to be 30% higher than the cost of recruiting based on internal resources. So it will be more expensive to outsource the recruitment. Yes, but only in the event of full success, i.e. a situation in which the candidate employed by the HR Manager will prove successful in the period expected by the company. Otherwise, we have to start recruiting from scratch, incurring all costs in turn and additionally lose what is most important to us, i.e. time. Head hunter, on the other hand, guarantees recruitment for about 12 months. Therefore, we are sure that we will not pay for the recruitment process a second time.