In regard to making a counterpoint to the argument that “recruitment and selection is a company’s most important function, I do believe that this is a critical component to achieving business success, however, the most important thing for company function is how upper management is ran. If upper management is not run well then you could hire the greatest person for that field in the world, but they will be limited in success because of the direction they are being given.
There are many reasons why a company may forego funding recruitment campaigns to allocate more money toward other components, the main one I can think of is what if the company doesn’t need that many people to operate. Plenty of organizations have too many employees, if you are working with less people sure you may have to do more work, but if the people working are reliable, the same job will likely get done without issue, hence why managers decide to fund other departments instead of recruitment.
The strengths that come with this are it is more economically friendly to forego heavily funding the recruitment team. It’s simple, the less money you have for recruitment, the more money you have for other things that are also critical to business success. The drawback to this is that you may be left with employees who are unmotivated or lack qualification for the job since the hiring process was very two dimensional. This could “domino effect” and lead to disruption in other parts of the company which could turn into long term issues.
Leave a Reply