It is too easy to become a recruiter. I suppose that can be said for a variety of disciplines, but I would wonder how closely those positions affect the bottom line the way recruiting does. A company is powered by its people and the gas of that engine is recruiting
I’ve been agnostic over most of my career within corporate TA as to which is better (in-house TA teams vs. RPO hiring models) and would always respond: “Well, It depends.” I’d cite complexity of positions, volume, readiness for change, cost, etc. In most cases also, that’s the right answer. Now, I’m working in RPO, I still answer the same way.
The final decision on engaging a RPO model should be based on a well-articulated business case that outlines the business impact, costs, risks, challenges and expected outcomes which will give a TA/HR
Management consulting at the top-management and Board levels often entails leadership assessment of inside and outside candidates by retained executive search firms. Although colloquially called "headhunters," this term is used also to describe contingency placement firms, which typically recruit and refer candidates at middle and lower management levels, and use very little assessment, if any. Conversely, retained executive search firms use relatively sophisticated tools and techniques to assess/evaluate internal and external leaders at the upper levels of management.
“To put the problem in the simplest terms, the interests of the client continue to be sidelined in the way the firm operates and thinks about making money.”
Greg Smith, former Executive Director at Goldman Sachs, in a March 14 Op Ed in the New York Times
Greg Smith, a former Executive Director at Goldman Sachs, recently wrote a scathing piece in the New York Times that decried what he sees as an ethical decline at the venerable investment bank. The article made waves, but it’s unlikely many readers were surprised by his allegations.