Article by Armando Cavero, Managing Partner of InterSearch Peru
Human capital is often considered the most valuable resource of an organization. However, this statement can be inconsistent when executives prioritize speed of service, low cost, and the option of not paying the consulting firm if they do not find the desired candidate. In the latter case, unfortunately, neither the companies perceive that they are thus authorizing the consultant, between the lines, not to find the desired candidate and accepting the possibility that the hiring process will not be completed and fail.
Choosing simplifications that underestimate the importance of filling key positions creates a dilemma between the declared philosophy and the actions taken. If it is a guiding principle that employees are our most important asset, why would this delicate process be given less relevance? I think this is something, at least, incongruent. Although it may be due to budget constraints or urgencies, it reflects a short-term business perspective that does not give real importance to the search process and the attraction of the best executives and with it, the effect they generate on the business results.
Considering a process as a better alternative because it is faster and cheaper, or because a provider serves hundreds of clients per month or year (an unequivocal sign that they are not executive search consultants), or because they claim to be very technological and thus their response will be faster, may seem attractive and efficient. However, how does this decision align with our commitment to confidentially finding scarce, talented individuals for key, complex positions that have a significant impact on our organization?
Business processes that are fast and lack the support of experienced professionals always result in lower quality. To go faster and reduce costs (be profitable), recruiters must shorten or skip steps, use shortcuts or less rigorous automated methods, conduct little research, or apply consulting hours of a lower executive level. Without “senior” consultants, which is the highest cost of a process, candidates are quickly proposed with a very basic analysis.
The greatest risk surfaces when incorporating individuals who do not align with the corporate culture or lack the necessary competencies and key experiences for the position, resulting in higher turnover and worse business results
Choosing faster and cheaper processes distracts us from considering that a reasonable investment in a well-structured process, a real effort to seriously seek the best employees, will take its due time and yield a much greater return in the short, medium, and long term. A well-chosen candidate will not only adapt better but will also have a greater impact on the team, on the company’s results, and the opposite is also sadly true.
This inconsistency can also affect the company’s brand image and reputation. When stakeholders, especially the closest ones, see decisions that do not align with the declared values, part of the trust is lost. Even the candidates may doubt whether human capital is truly the most important thing for the company, as this is not reflected in the decisions of a potential employer.
Widening the gap between the proclaimed importance of human capital and the decisions made to find it brings counterproductive results. Organizations could well opt for the quality and professional weight of consultants over speed and apparent cost. Only in this way will they improve their results and long-term sustainability, understanding that finding and choosing those who will make a difference is not done better if it is faster and cheaper, but quite the opposite.
