I’m live blogging from the second #MBuzz event in London. The topic is around HR and Recruiters. Strategic? Friends? Part of the same team? You get the picture. I will be covering the panel discussion live, and publishing the discussion as it happens, so forgive any typos or errors.
The panel is made up of Rob Jones from Mastersorbust blog, Donna Miller from Enterprise, Charu Malhorta from Unilever, and Simon Boulcott from AIB.
Question: Why the animosity to HR with recruiters?
It’s territory fighting in Rob Jones view. It’s a battle to be relevant in the business that goes on between the two disciplines. HR are pigeon holed, where as recruiters can be a bit more agile.
Recruiting is about relationships. Not about delivery says the panel. I think this is cobblers. Rob recruitment needs to be like marketing. Recruitment should work for marketing says Charu. Marketing are 3 years ahead of recruiting. Chairman of the panel Keith Robinson says that recruiters are paid too much to work in HR. Simon says that he would rather use a head hunter for senior positions, and let recruiters deal with the core recruiting. Specialist roles are cheaper to go external rather than building a function. This is where the future is for external recruiters.
It’s a redundant view to think in-house recruiters are just failed recruiters. in-house you are far more accountable for the role. Is there a DNA difference between HR and recruiting. Jones thinks the DNA is the same, we are just thinking of an old type of HR, the cardigan wearing form fillers. HR is a different beast now. The best people in recruiting or HR came from the business not out of it, is the position of half the panel. You can’t hire for the business unless you have been in it, for Unilever though it is best person for the job inside or out of the organisation?
Robinson asks if HR can survive without recruiters or vice-a-versa? Business needs talent. Where it comes from is irrelevant. Business needs specialists in all functions. Clearly there is a divide, my thought is shouldn’t businesses be fighting the competition, the government and the economy rather than each other? It has been a lively debate. What is your view?
The vote was is: “Is recruitment strategic?
My result “No, but it should be.” The majority say it should be, and is. Thank-you to the panel. Loved the debate,