Contract vs. Full-time Recruiters

Alan Lee, who has been involved in recruiting (and downsizing) at Coca-Cola and NationsBank, and Gregg McCormick, a Gartner VP, share how their experiences in tough economic times have shaped their views on the use of contract recruiters vs. full-time recruiters.

Lee: In the downsizing at The Coca-Cola Company, we did have some contract recruiters on our team and when we knew we were going to cut back, we cancelled the contractors immediately. I think this was somewhat of a knee-jerk reaction on my part. It seemed logical, but the trouble is they were some of our best recruiters! I would recommend that companies have measurements in place to be able to rank the pool of recruiters, including contractors, and keep a blend of temporary and permanent recruiters. However, if you are a recruiting director and you don’t understand or actively engage in workforce planning to get your staffing plan, then you will at best be reactively accurate.

McCormick: I have a unique view on that. I do not view my talent pool, my recruiters, differently, whether they are in the variable workforce or full-time employees. I ask for the same ratios, the same ‘miles per gallon,’ the same number of candidates presented. So no, I wouldn’t be shifting my resources one way or the other. Whether I am offering a recruiter full-time status or a variable contract is decided at the time I bring them on my team.

Article Continues Below

Excerpted from the April issue of the Journal of Corporate Recruiting Leadership.


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *